MovieChat Forums > Donald Trump Discussion > T-rump's sister quickly retires as a Fed...

T-rump's sister quickly retires as a Federal Judge to end judicial 'investigation'


T-rump's sister Maryanne Trump Barry, 82, quickly and quietly voluntarily retired as a federal appellate judge in Philadelphia last month, bringing the 'civil misconduct inquiry' launched against her to an end.

Her retirement was made public in an April 1 order signed by a top court official in New York, where the misconduct case against her was assigned to prevent 'conflicts of interest' for judges who knew Barry back in Philadelphia.

The civil misconduct inquiry stems from a New York Times report back in the fall that she participated in Trump family schemes to avoid paying taxes back in the 1980s and 1990s. A judicial investigation began in response to four citizen complaints filed in October after The New York Times published the story. The April 1 order says that Barry's "voluntary retirement" from all judicial duties now ends the civil misconduct investigation.

According to the Times' report, Barry, T-rump and their siblings had over $1 B transferred into their financial accounts during that period by their father Fred T-rump. That would have produced a tax bill of at least $550M, but through tax schemes the children only paid $52M.

“If the Times story is correct, then she participated in a decades-long multimillion-dollar tax fraud. That should be an impeachable offense. She gets her full salary,” Scott Shuchart an attorney who filed one of the complaints, said.

“I think it’s appalling that we’re continuing to pay this criminal and that she now has completely avoided consequence,” he added. “It’s ridiculous.”

reply

is there a statute of limitations on tax fraud?

reply

I’m not sure. However, civil complaints and suits can be done at anytime and she would pay the consequences.

reply

Statute of limitations on criminal actions and civil actions probably expired, but this was a misconduct investigation into her suitability as a lifetime appointee to the federal bench. She can get defrocked for old stuff, if she's demonstrably guilty

reply

Lock her up!!!

reply

I've always found it odd that if you earn some money and pay income tax on it , then you give it to someone else , the govt take a second bite!

What happens if person B gives it back to person A ? they take another (3rd) 25% ?

reply

Why wouldn't the person receiving the money pay tax on it? It's INcoming money, hence, income. That's not a "second bite" because the first person (the giver) only pays taxes on the money while it's his; once he gifts it to the second person he can then debit the amount against his income the year he gave it away. What's so unfair about that?

reply

That’s exactly right! It’s pretty straight forward.

reply

I dont think it would work that way in the UK. If you earn 50k , and give 20k away , you cant debit that and say you earned 30k.
unless you are giving it to a registered charity

reply

If you take in 50k and pay 20k to an assistant, then yes, your net income is 30k.

reply

Exactly. Or if you owned a business which netted $200,000 in sales but wrote off $190,000 in expenses (pretty easy to do ) then you only profit $10,000 - and that's what you're taxed on (and that's what many do).

reply

I've always wondered if, in the cases of lottery winners or the like who want to give fund to a friend or family member if it would be legal and smarter to open an account in your name (after having paid the initial taxes), deposit the amount you want to give the other person and then make them an authorized signer on the account (not a co-owner, just an authorized user). They'd have no tax responsibility, access to the money and the government would have gotten a FAIR amount of taxes.

reply

Yet if the account gains interest each year ( especially on a sizable amount) who would legally be responsible to Pay the income tax on it? The winner or the beneficiary? That’s another can of worms!

reply

But see, here's something I have to explain to my gf's mother each year when interest on her trust is taxed. Even if the interest were taxed on the (highly improbable) 60%.....it's still 60% of the interest. So you still made money even after. It's not coming off the principal. In my scenario, the primary account holder would be responsible for itbut would pay it out of the interest that the account earned.

reply

Even if the interest were taxed on the (highly improbable) 60%.....it's still 60% of the interest. So you still made money even after.


True. So if you're paying 60% of the interest, you're still keeping an additional 40%, which isn't bad at all.

But if you (or gf's mother) were a T-rump, you would find enough loopholes - apparently illegal ones - to fraud the government and only pay 1% instead of 60%.

reply

If I were T-Rump i’d hire smarter people than me to figure it out, you mean.

You know, like morons or village idiots.

Or Trump supporters.

reply

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply

In any case, let's lock up Maryanne T-rump!

reply