Posted on 05/08/2019 5:59:58 PM PDT by jazusamo
Full title: Hans von Spakovsky: NY Times publication of Trump tax information violates his legal right to confidentiality
The New York Times no doubt considers it quite a coup to have obtained and published President Trump’s tax return information from 1985 to 1994. But doing so violated Trump’s right under federal law to the confidentiality of his tax returns.
The Times – which reported that Trump’s businesses lost $1.17 billion during the 10-year period – has no more right to Trump’s tax returns than it has to mine or those of any of you reading these words.
Confidentiality, as the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held in 1991 in U.S. v. Richey, is essential to “maintaining a workable tax system.”
Taxpayer privacy is “fundamental to a tax system that relies on self-reporting” since it protects “sensitive or otherwise personal information,” said then-Judge (now Supreme Court Justice) Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1986 in another case when she served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Federal law – 26 U.S.C. §7213(a)(1) – makes it a felony for any federal employee to disclose tax returns or “return information.” Infractions are punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine as high as $250,000 under the Alternative Fines Act (18 U.S.C. §3571).
Regardless of the accuracy or inaccuracy of The New York Times story, tax returns themselves, as well as tax return information such as these IRS transcripts (which are a summary of the tax returns), are protected from disclosure by federal law. And this provision applies to private individuals as well as government employees, a fact that should be considered by the New York Times’ source.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
>>> violates his legal right to confidentiality
And?
As their circulation continues to decline, in a couple of years it will be possible to arrest the entire newsroom and not overpopulate the jails.
Reason number 152,347,741 why the Income Tax is unConstitutional to its very core and needs to be abolished once and for all.
Being “transcripts” of his tax forms, I imagine these were not leaked by the IRS.
I suppose it could be any number of banks or even government agencies (perhaps needing tax info for bids, etc...) Trump dealt with in those years.
Couldn’t happen to a slimier rad. :^)
Sue the NYT and use the money to build that wall.
He has spoken about his losses in the past and on The Apprentice so this is not news, yet CNNMSNBCNBCABCCBS hosts are squealing like little piggies who just discovered mud baths. I would love for Trump to sue the hell out of them for so much money they’d finally have to shut down for good. They’re already on the brink of extinction.
Funny I would’ve thought the opposite. Aren’t the transcripts how the IRS records the returns? Trump’s people would likely have the actual long-form returns. Though I suppose it is possible that his attorneys or CPAs with power of attorney could have requested copies of the IRS transcripts for legitimate purposes.
REMEMBER, if they (the NYTimes et al) can do it to Trump, they can EASILY do the same to you or I ...
Or anyone else contemplating a run for office ANYWHERE.
Good question. I wonder if a little forensics might show how the documents were saved, perhaps matching IRS technology at the time (?). Anyway, NY Times won't be saying
Support Free Republic, Folks! Donate today!
Exactly!...von Spakovsky makes that clear, this is a concern for everyone.
The author raises good points here, but I would not dismiss the possibility that this information was given to the NYT by someone who had every legal right to do so ... including the possibility that Trump himself wanted this information published.
One MUST presume that President Trump’s lawyers are readying a massive lawsuit?
I certainly hope so!
“...including the possibility that Trump himself wanted this information published.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Aaaaaaaannnddd...we have today’s winning post! You betcha Trump wants to this out.
Just Democrats doing what rats do.
It is long past time that someone step up and run for the office of POTUS on a platform of repealing the 16th Amendment.
And the 17th, too!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.