I'm not under selling it. The first half is literally all we know.
Posted by
spamlet
Oct 3 '16, 15:17
|
As I posted Saturday night, most of that could very well have been clawed back in a personal bankruptcy as he would have to had basis in those entities and he probably did that through recourse debt. If the debt went bad to his companies because of their bankruptcy, he gets a bad debt deduction. If he then gets them discharged in a personal bankruptcy the NOLs get reduced due to the cancellation of indebtedness rules in Section 108 and elsewhere.
To assume he carried those forward and paid no taxes for 15 years is the worst case scenario, which the Times ran with. It makes for a better story for them and could needle him into proving them wrong (another win for them if they are released). To pretend otherwise is underselling the NYT interest in it.
|
Responses:
|