He Didn't Pay That: Mitt's Hazy Tax Returns

     It tells you all you need to know regarding where this campaign is that they wanted to change the subject back to his tax returns-and away from the conversation over the 47%.

     Romney's release seems impressive-he went back to 1990. Still this was only a summary and we still don't know a whole lot. He claims to have averaged a 20.5% tax rate in that time.

     That's no huge number in any case. Yet as we don't see the details its difficult to make much of the 20% number. One theory I have is that Romney likely paid a much higher tax rate in the 1990s with the higher rates on both capital gains and the top rate.

      So assuming that the 20% rate is accurate-which we don't know-it may well be that his average was considerably higher in the 90s and considerably lower after the Bush tax cuts.

       So while in a way, it's welcome to get info for 20 years-even though insufficient-but it might actually be more meaningful if he gave us the average for just the last 10 years since the Bush tax cuts.

       The trouble is that all this really is are the crib notes. It doesn't tell you too much. My guess is a big dividing line is the Bush tax cuts and the difference prior and after that presuming this 20% average rate is really accurate.

       Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, says the campaign still hasn’t released enough information to make an accurate assessment of Romney’s wealth and tax history.

      “We can’t really know what it means without having more information,” he said.

       "To arrive at the 20.2 percent figure the campaign said it added up the rate paid in each year and then took the average of those numbers."

      "That’s not the most precise way to determine the average amount of taxes the Romneys paid over 20 years, Williams said.

      "The most accurate way to calculate the figure, he said, is to add up the Romneys’ income and taxes paid between 1990 and 2009 and determine the average rate based on those figures. Depending on how the math works, that kind of calculation could have left the Romneys with a lower average rate over the course of the 20 years."

     "The Romney campaign still won’t release tax returns beyond 2010 and 2011. The summary of the 20-year data comes from a letter notarized by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which prepares the Romneys’ tax returns."

     http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81541.html?hp=l1_b1

     So while the Romney team may hope this puts this question to bed, it seems to more open the door than close it as we still really can't judge anything much from what they released.

     Then there's the fact that the 2011 number he's supposed to have paid-14.2% likely is inflated as he deliberately didn't take certain charitable deductions. If you factor them in, it was a rate of 12.2%. Bear in mind that he can still amend his returns and take advantage of them after the election.

   http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/mitt-romneys-real-effective-tax-rate.php?ref=fpb

   Some people are wondering why he released the 20 year summary now. My guess is partly this seemed like the best choice out of a list of bad choices. Stonewalling has really hurt his public standing as someone who is not transparent about either his own personal finances or what he would do as President.

   Then again maybe he thought it better to get this cleared  up before the Immaculate Debates he thinks are going to somehow move this election 180 degrees.

   Worse, though, is I think they were so punch drunk after getting hit over his "We are the 53%" speech that this seemed like a welcome diversion. The theme of the Romney campaign is to leap from pr disaster to disaster. Back in July, the trip to Europe and Israel was supposed to be a diversion from the discussion about his tax returns. Then that was more trouble so he tried to go "game changer" by selecting Ryan.

   Of course, that proved no watershed either and now Ryan has seen his reputation as a policy wonk take a beating. Then there was the convention in Tampa. Then there was the economic report the day after the DNC finished. Then it was trying to gain politically by bashing the President over the Libya attack.

   Then he got neck deep in the 47% video. So now he wants to discuss his taxes again.