20 Jan

Republicans In Denial [Reader Post]

                                       

Get familiar with the names BCIP Associates III Cayman and Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd. If Romney is the Republican nominee they will become a household names. Why? Let me explain.

BCIP Associates III Cayman and Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd are basically nothing more then P.O. boxes in Bermuda and the Grand Cayman Island. The number of words in the names of these companies is greater then the total sum of employees on the payroll. No secretaries, no janitors, no interns. Just a few lawyers working out of their own offices with a plaque on the wall. In essence these are companies in name only. They are what is more commonly known as off shore accounts. They can and are directly linked to Romney. You know, the same Mitt Romney who is trying to convince everyone he is Mr. Everyman. Starting ring a few bells? Maybe its because we’ve been down this road before and the only thing that has changed for the Obama campaign and the media is the publish dates of the articles written before and will be again. The facts have not changed . The accusations remain the same.

Did Mitt Romney do something illegal? No.

Did Bain Capital do something illegal? Again, no.

So why does any of this matter?

The reason these BCIP Associates III Cayman and Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd matter is because these companies are going to be used to thump Romney over the head with by the Obama campaign whenever the word “taxes” is uttered.

A Los Angeles Times article from 2007 explains it much better than I can.

“In the Cayman Islands, Romney was listed as a general partner and personally invested in BCIP Associates III Cayman, a private equity fund that is registered at a post office box on Grand Cayman Island and that indirectly buys equity in U.S. companies. The arrangement shields foreign investors from U.S. taxes they would pay for investing in U.S. companies”

And from the same article.

“Investing through what’s known as a blocker corporation in Bermuda protects tax-exempt American institutions, such as pension plans, hospitals and university endowments, from paying a 35% tax on what the Internal Revenue ServiceService calls “unrelated business income” from domestic hedge funds that invest in debt, experts say.”

When trying to engage most conservative pundits, talk radio show hosts, and Romney campaign staffers about these off shore accounts one is accused of being anti-capitalist. A Occupy Wall Street lacky. A Ron Paul supporter. None of which is true for most of us. The problem is that the “Republican Establishment” is in deep, deep, deep dangerous denial if they think the issue of Romney using off shore accounts to shield investors and investments from the United States Tax Code is going to be an easy sell to the precious Jane and John Doe Independent voter in the general election. They just don’t want to hear it, talk about it, or deal with it. Not a good stategery if you ask me. Its as if they asume a Independent voting in the general election will be looking at this information through the same set of eyes as a Conservative voting in the Republican primary. Most Republican primary voters not supporting Ron Paul understand the reasons why companies use off shore accounts. Most see no problem with it. In fact may even incourage it.

Independent voters on the other hand have a much harder time relating to these accounts as it is. Add to this the Obama campaign and the media filtering how the Independent voter will again recieve this information and the problem becomes obvious and predictable. One ad on national T.V. will leave the independent voter thinking and realizing that Jane and John Doe independent don’t have off shore accounts. They are paying their taxes without the use of loopholes. How can Mitt Romney argue cutting taxes when in their mind he isn’t paying his fair share in the first place? How does Romney argue for reducing the deficit by cutting social programs when he is hiding money off shore that could fund them? If Romney isn’t using these companies to subvert the tax code, why do they even exist then? What would be the point? Why go through the hassel? Something doesnt smell right to them.

Republicans and conservatives are just not going to be able to win the Romney off shore account argument with the Independent voters using the same idiotic retorts currently being thrown at conservatives pointing out the fact that this could be a problem. Instead of whining about conservatives bring the issue up, Republicans and Conservatives of all stripes should be figuring out how they are going to deal with the inevitable class warfare that is going to be ramping up as the Novemeber election nears. Pretending Romney’s use of off shore accounts is no big deal is not going to end well for the Republican party.

My Pappy always said when your head is burried in the sand that means your ass is up in the air unprotected and just begging to be kicked.

The Republican Party is about to prove the man right, again.

About Michael Henkins

He is just a fat guy in Maine.
This entry was posted in Mitt Romney, Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Friday, January 20th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
| 977 views

40 Responses to Republicans In Denial [Reader Post]

  1. Disturber says: 1

    I could not agree more and I am saddened by this. Romney probably did nothing illegal, but the Obama smear machine with eviscerate him with the combination of Bain corporate raiding and these offshore accounts. The demonstrable facts that he is a smart business person, with a strong sense of organization and considerable management skills will not overcome these negatives. By the time Obama and company are through with him, and with the total support of the media, Romney will look like a robber baron who cares not about the country, about average Americans, the economy or anything else. These negatives will end up defining him and he will lose the election and lose it big time. It is a sad state of affairs that we have arrived at a point in the nominating process where each of the likely candidates is loaded with baggage and is a prime target for the smear attacks to come. I must say that I am a bit discouraged.

    Disturber

    ReplyReply
  2. Michael Henkins
    hi
    I don’t think it will be easy to explain, that he is preventing FOREIGNERS from legally pay tax
    due in the USA, WHILE INVESTING IN BUSYNESS ENDEAVOR, which probably take the space of true AMERICANS WHO WANT TO START A  BUSYNESS, what is it with the AMERICAS,are they feeling so desperate as to favor FOREIGNERS TO COME AS OPPOSE TO THE ALREADY AMERICANS LIVING HERE TO SUPPORT THEM IN STARTING BUSYNESS THEMSELVES, WHY SELL AMERICA BITS BY BITS TO FOREIGNERS, why   OBAMA  does  PREVENT AMERICA TO START BUSYNESS AND CREATE JOBS FOR AMERICA BY AMERICANS FOR AMERICA TO PROSPER,

    wrong way to succeed

    ReplyReply
  3. I meant why does OBAMA prevent the AMERICANS to start and hold busyness by his constant entitlement
    over them with regulations which are crushing the busyness to go ahead in their creativity, he is discouraging the AMERICANS to keep their busyness working,

    ReplyReply
  4. GaffaUK says: 4

    So would conservatives on here like to close these tax dodging but currently legal loopholes?

    ReplyReply
  5. Aqua says: 5

    @GaffaUK:
    The GOP has already called for tax reform. They want to close loopholes and lower rates. As soon as you say “lower rates,” the dems start screaming. If you can raise more money by closing loopholes and lowering the rates, why would that be a bad thing?
    Another problem dems have is differentiating between income and wealth. Most millionaires and billionaires receive their income from investments. This is taxed at a different rate. Even democrats believe this rate should be low to encourage investment. Obama has proposed lowering this rate for small businesses.
    So, I’ll turn the question around. What would the democrats on this board do to encourage the wealthy to invest their money here instead of off shore?

    ReplyReply
  6. Mike Henkins says: 6

    Here is a little more detailed information from a Rueturs article of exactly why Romney, Bain Capital, and others use off shore accounts.

    Daniel Berman, a former U.S. Treasury deputy international tax counsel and now director of tax at Boston University’s graduate tax program.

    Bain funds in which Romney is involved are scattered from Delaware to the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, Ireland and Hong Kong, according to a Reuters analysis of securities filings.

    “Certain interests in foreign investment structures would have to be reported on attachments to his return,” Berman said.

    The wealthiest Americans typically earn a large chunk of their income from investments – much of it in capital gains.

    Because capital gains generally are taxed at 15 percent compared with the top ordinary income tax rate of 35 percent, those with significant income from capital gains may pay lower tax rates than many Americans.

    On capital gains, Romney’s tax returns would not reveal any gains that he has not yet realized, even though those gains would be easy for him to lock in at any time, Berman said.

    “I remember as a young lawyer being surprised to see tax returns of very successful investors showing net losses – because they were recognizing net losses – not unrealized gains,” Berman said.

    Romney’s returns also might not spell out how much he benefits from a tax break called the carried interest loophole.

    This rule allows private equity and hedge fund managers to pay the 15 percent capital gains tax rate, rather than the top income tax rate, on a large portion of their earnings

    Once again my point in the article is not about whether or not using these off shore accounts is illegal or should be illegal`

    ReplyReply
  7. Nan G says: 7

    @Mike Henkins:

    From Deleware….
    Delaware is a major tax haven!
    BIDEN!
    On paper 6,500 companies call Delaware home.
    BIDEN!
    Delaware shell companies might be a mail box or a small office with one clerk for paperwork.
    BIDEN!
    Delaware cheats other states out of taxes.
    BIDEN!
    Nearly two-thirds of the Fortune 500, have tax-exempt subsidiaries in Delaware to reduce their state tax bills.
    BIDEN!

    In April, 2011, a senior official of the Cayman Islands Financial Services Association asserted that Delaware promoted tax evasion and money laundering, thus qualifying the United States as a tax haven.
    Federal officials view the issue as a state matter and are not pushing for changes in Delaware, the home state of Vice President Joseph R. BIDEN Jr.

    So, it is OL for Mitt Romney to have tax havens in Delaware but somehow ”criminal” for him to have the exact same set-ups in Delaware?
    BIDEN?

    ReplyReply
  8. Nan G says: 8

    No ”edit” button this time?
    OK, not ”OL,” lol.

    ReplyReply
  9. Curt says: 9

    I’ve tried updating that edit plugin…still no ability to edit comments for everyone?

    ReplyReply
  10. Mike Henkins says: 10

    Nope

    ReplyReply
  11. DaNang67 says: 11

    Perhaps this is the reason why the Axelrod media attack any Romney opponent with all guns blazing whenever one appears to threaten their chosen opponent. They’ll go easy on Mittens until he’s the only one left.

    I still think there’s an October surprise awaiting us regarding Romney, but this illustrates why they spent so much effort creating the “Occupy” movement.

    ReplyReply
  12. Curt says: 12

    Ok, trying a new plugin which gives some more options and edit features…let me know how it works for everyone.

    ReplyReply
  13. Bruce says: 13

    You guys forget the biggest cheater of all, the illegal occupant in the White House. When he releases all his papers we will all know he is not eligible to be there! What is he hiding?

    ReplyReply
  14. DaNang67

    hi,

    starting the occupy movement that early, might be they where one step ahead, of ROMNEY’s candidacy?,

    with what has been open now on him,  like preparing this all by themself to explode on him,

    they sure want to hurt him, as we see now

    bye

    ReplyReply
  15. JustAl says: 15

    The time is rapidly approaching when the GOP has to decide to either stand for something other than the (slightly) lessor of two evils or become a third party.

    It’s always amusing when GOP stalwarts accuse me and my kind of “getting Clinton elected” by voting for Perot (although I think I read somewhere that Bush couldn’t have won even with those votes) and I point out how dead right Perot was and how dead wrong Bush and Clinton both were on NAFTA.  That is the treaty that got American industry used to offshoring jobs, making the move to China a walk in the park.  That sucking sound was real then, and it’s real now, except then it was the sound of jobs being sucked across the boarder, now it’s the sound of the GOP struggling to stay viable.

    ReplyReply
  16. CURT

    THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU’R DOING TO MAKE IT EASY FOR US,

    Bye

    editting this might work, lets go below

    edit again, second time

    edit,  a bit confuse between  the UPDATE OR CLOSE BELOW

    BUT IT’S MY NATURE

    ReplyReply
  17. MataHarley says: 17

    JustAl, I agree that the GOP leadership needs to better reflect the agenda of the voting conservatives and Republicans. But it seems to me that it’s much easier to boot the RINOs out of the driver’s seat, and get them replaced with genuinely conservative leaders. Why reinvent the wheel? Just take back the car, and all it’s amenities, that’s been hijacked, right?

    I too have voted third party in my past, and I don’t feel the least bit guilty about it. First of all, casting a ballot is the only direct say any of us ever has, unless we’ve been an elected official. I try not to miss those moments when I can speak my piece, unedited. The second reason I’m not feeling guilty about it is because neither of the two options had enough space between them to make a difference for me. And I’m truly tired of holding my nose during that time honored tradition of voting when I see little effective difference.

    But I’ll disagree that NAFTA was the start of manufacturing leaving the US. That’s been going on since the 70s, starting with the steel mills. Copper followed, and so on. The latest is the enviros, attempting to forbid us from using our own trees for logging, and prefer that Canada cut down theirs for export instead.

    ReplyReply
  18. Curt says: 18

    Ok, it looks like the new plugin interferes with the reply button, I’ll look on a fix for that when I have time. No time now, heading to San Francisco for the game.

    ReplyReply
  19. MataHarley says: 19

    BTW, Michael… great insight with your FA contribution here.  It’s ironic that many attempt to disqualify Newt because “character matters”, but don’t think that a potential POTUS, setting the example of those avoiding US taxes, isn’t also a “character” issue.

    As I said, I think most voters can accept one who marries his mistresses more easily than someone that may be viewed as a corporate raider and tax shelter specialist, avoiding US taxes.  Consider that Obama’s entire campaign theme is going to be about that abused “middle class” vs those evil wealthy, taking advantage of such IRS loopholes, Romney is their perfect opponent.  I’m quite sure they have a tee with a bullseye on it,  ready and waiting for him.

    I’m not much of a Don Imus fan, and he’s a Romney supporter.  But as he observed this morning, if Romney can’t even handle Newt in a debate, what makes anyone think he can live thru Obama in the general?  The deer in the headlight, and avoidance dance about taxes is not a good move for him.  The disclosure is directly tied to the attack Obama will take – how he made his money, and where it is today. The legality of it is not in question. However the perception of whether he’s the perfect “evil rich capitalist” foil to Obama’s heartripping abused middle class is.

    ReplyReply
  20. CURT

    HAVE A GOOD TIME, YOU DESERVE YOUR DAY OFF,

    BYE

    EDIT  WE’LL SURVIVE TILL THEN

     

    ReplyReply
  21. Richard Wheeler says: 21

     Mata  No question the use of offshore “tax shelters” by a billionaire paying 15% is gonna be a MAJOR PROBLEM against BHO. The Dem Party thanks all those who have brought this to the attention of the American voter.Special thumbs up to Newt.Good luck in S.C.

    ReplyReply
  22. anticsrocks says: 22

    Unfortunately even though Mittens has done nothing wrong, this plays right into Obama’s class warfare tack he has taken as of the last few months.

     

     

    ReplyReply
  23. MataHarley says: 23

    Yes, rich wheeler.. it will be made an issue by Obama.  Despite the fact it’s legal, it does become a perceptive “character issue” for the lib/prog left and some Indys. As I said, given my choice between a guy who got two divorces, and actually married his mistresses, vs a guy who’s hiding his tax returns and source income/tax shelters – even legal – I’ll take the divorced guy.

    And why the heck do you think they are so very anxious to anoint Mittens? duh… welcome to reality. Of course, that may have been why you’ve been busy, shoving Mittens down our throats, eh? Not so quick, Bubba. The defiant horse race is on. Fasten your seat belt. And most of us haven’t been dumb enough to buy your party’s sleight of hand intrusion into the GOP primary.

    Of course, you need to remember that the left tends to resist any IRS reform….  The only thing they care about is to get another $80 bil per year from the evil rich, instead of real reform.

    ReplyReply
  24. MATA

    hi,

    yes, you had it all figured out,

    good show,

    bye

    ReplyReply
  25. I have to say also that RON PAUL MADE A SUPER SPEECH,  AND ROMNEY TOO.

    ReplyReply
  26. WE ARE OVER ESTIMATING OBAMA, look at where we are, no jobs on sight, the separation of AMERICA BY HATEFULL STATEMENTS , THE RACE CARD CONSTANTLY AROUND ON  THEIR MOUTHS,

    NO ACHIEVEMENTS EVEN IF IT’S THERE UNDER HIS NOSE HE REFUSE IT ON EXCUSES FROM A GROUP OF GREEN ACTIVISTS WHO DON’T EVEN HOLD ANY SOLUTIONS OR PROOF TANGIBLE TO BE CREDIBLE, BUT THE VOTES FOR OBAMA ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN AMERICA’S JOBS,

    HE DOESN’T COME CLOSE TO THE CONSERVATIVES CANDIDATES, AND HIS BAND OF BROTHERS ATTACK AND INSULT THESE CANDIDATES, WHICH ARE FAR SUPERIOR BY A LONG SHOT,

    ReplyReply
  27. Someone said, “Boo!” and Romney got spooked.  Next he will be surprised to find that it is not an issue with the Right. They couldn’t care less about his tax returns. But it has revealed Romney’s weakness to be the age-old fear of What the Left Thinks.

    A big, fat, FEH for his fecklessness.

    ReplyReply
  28. Pingback: Rep. Gabrielle Giffords will Resign from Congress | Random Ramblings from IowaDawg

  29. Independent says: 28

    I keep laughing when I see people say in reference to abusing a tax loophole to shirk one’s duty to pay for their fair share: “He didn’t do anything wrong”. Tax loopholes may be legal, but they are wrong. Some people just don’t understand that it’s not anti-capitlalist to make a honest buck. One might not want someone to be the POTUS that is willing to do something that may considered to be wrong, but is barely legal. I think Romney and his campaign know this.

    ReplyReply
  30. Ditto says: 29

    Listening to the Establishment GOP gave us John McCain, and we all remember how well that “electability” recommendation ended. There is nothing more to say. No matter how many times he states the untruth, by his positions and history, Newt is not a conservative. This is the same school of political thinking  who said Ronald Regan was unelectable.

    Unless someone new enters the field, Santorum is the only remaining Conservative candidate. Period.

    ReplyReply
  31. anticsrocks says: 30

    @Ditto: Well the American Conservative Union doesn’t see it that way. Santorum has an 88% lifetime Conservative voting record and Newt has a 90% lifetime voting record, and his pro-life voting record is 98.6%.

    And in 2008, Rick Santorum said this about Conservatism:

    This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone. – Source

    From the author of the article linked above:

    Santorum certainly isn’t unique within the community of current and former lawmakers in his faith that government has the answers and the moral requirement to make fiscal decisions (including where charitable contributions are to be made, and in what amounts) for the American people as a whole. However, denying that such a belief is “big government conservatism” (if it is conservatism at all) is only surpassed on the absurdity scale by the claim that such a belief truly represents “the genuine conservatism our Founders envisioned.”

    ReplyReply
  32. Ditto says: 31

    Even an establishment Republican can have a voting record that looks Conservative at first glance, but you need to examine if their voting record shifted from conservative when they first took office, to more progressive as they spent more time in Washington (where they lose touch with the voters who put them there and can be seduced by the dark side of the party into a progressive/establishment crony). Remember that Al Gore was at first pro-2nd Amendment, but turned to pro-con control after being seduced by the Democratic Party Leadership. Nor does their voting record alone encompass everything that they do. Newt’s current campaign rhetoric is not Conservative. His personal history has morphed from Conservative to that of Progressive self gratification.

    ReplyReply
  33. Ditto, NEWT got involve to take the sides of the CONSERVATIVES earlyer in a passionate speech that people still remember, he came out, on a road where OBAMA should have come, and other DEMOCRATS TO SCARE TO TOUCH, BECAUSE NOT TO OFFEND, THAT IS THE REGULAR SENTENCE THEY ALL USED LIKE COWARD WHEN THE TIME TO SPEAK OUT COME URGENTLY,
    AND NEWT GINGRISH DID COME OUT, I always admire those who dare to take the side of the COUNTRY, WHEN THE PERILS ARE FACING IT. AND THERE WAS MANY WHO SAW AND REMEMBER THAT TIME AND NEWT WAS NOT A CANDIDATE, THERE WAS NO CANDIDATES, THERE WAS NO ELECTION CAMPAIGN, THEN WHEN HE STOOD OUT ON THE CONSERVATIVES SIDE

    ReplyReply
  34. MataHarley says: 33

    Ditto: Even an establishment Republican can have a voting record that looks Conservative at first glance, but you need to examine if their voting record shifted from conservative when they first took office, to more progressive as they spent more time in Washington

    Newt’s voting record predominately spans from 1979 to 1995, when he assumed the role of Speaker. The votes on bills became fewer then because traditionally Speakers refrain from floor debates and votes… but do participate in a few.

    There’s nothing wrong with Newt’s voting record. What conservatives hate is that he bargained and was seen as “compromising”… much as Reagan did… to nudge the Congress to the right.

    Newt’s current campaign rhetoric is not Conservative.

    ??? Surely you have something in mind, here. What bothers you, Ditto? Because I have to say that the SC exit polls show that those describing themselves as Very Conservative and Conservatives are voting more heavily for Newt than anyone else. So apparently they have a different view of conservative.

    There is nothing progressive about Newt. That’s truly a leap into fantasy land.

    ReplyReply
  35. Independent says: 34

    @ilovebeeswarzone English, try it!

    ReplyReply
  36. MataHarley says: 35

    Independent, you’re new to the FA community, so allow me to introduce you to our northern Canadian denizen, Ms. Bees. English is not her first language, but after over a year or so of hanging here, she has been improving.

    As she tries to improve, we’ve all learned to “speak Bees” in the process… LOL

    ReplyReply
  37. Independent
    hi,
    what is your problem now? my 32 I rechecked it again, and it is perfect,
    do you have a intent to discredit my efforts on being better than I was and still getting better as the days go by?
    poleezze come and take this desperate commenter.

    ReplyReply
  38. Independent says: 37

    My apologies. It just appeared to be ranting (overuse of capital letters) in barely coherent babbling. Perhaps you should try google translate and chill with the caps lock.

    ReplyReply
  39. Independent
    now you’re getting to the point, I can take advice,
    perhaps you can stop babbling incoherently, because you only have one foot on the door,
    and the rest of you’re body on the floor like a snake rolling on itself,
    I will accept apologies

    ReplyReply
  40. Pingback: Romney’s off-shore accounts about to become a political nightmare for the GOP | Bay State Conservative News

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>