Even more signs point to Romney being a Swiss bank tax evader who benefited

[pnwmom]

from the 2009 tax amnesty program.

According to Business Insider, he filed a return in 2007 that listed UBS but didn't specify that the account was in Switzerland. Then, in 2009, the IRS offered a one year amnesty program so tax evaders in Switzerland could come clean. We don't know that Romney participated in that program. But we do know that in 2010 he amended his 2007 return to mention that the account was in Switzerland; and he also closed the account-- logical things to do if he had had a previously undisclosed account there that he had finally acknowledged to the I.R.S.

http://www.businessinsider.com/is-the-noose-closing-around-romneys-tax-returns-2012-7

Wouldn't it be great if we knew which Swiss bank Romney's money had been hidden in? As you may know, the IRS nailed Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) for helping Americans commit tax evasion (the illegal kind, as opposed to legal tax avoidance). As a result, UBS coughed up the names of more than 4400 Americans (out of 52,000 originally sought by the IRS) who had accounts there. This was the backdrop to the IRS amnesty: for the first time, the U.S. had breached Swiss banking secrecy and Americans with Swiss bank accounts could no longer be sure that their secret was safe.

In fact, we do know which bank held $3 million of Ann Romney's blind trust. It was UBS.

How do we know? Brad Malt, the Romneys' trustee, said so. Not only that, when Romney released his 2010 tax return in January of this year, he had to amend two previously filed disclosure forms, for 2007 and 2011. In 2007, he had not specified that the UBS account was in Switzerland, not the U.S., according to ABC News (UBS has branches in the U.S.).

Let's review the bidding: Ambiguous disclosure in 2007. UBS income on 2010 tax return. Retroactive revision of 2007 disclosure. IRS amnesty for undisclosed foreign accounts in 2009 powered by UBS prosecution. Refusal to release 2009 tax return. Yes, 2009 could be a big problem.

Read more: http://middleclasspoliticaleconomist.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-noose-closing-around-romneys-tax.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FmoiCu+%28Middle+Class+Political+Economist%29&utm_content=Google+Reader#ixzz211qOGUt9

[someone15]

1. Spam deleted by hlthe2b (MIR Team)

[pnwmom]

2. You are pathetic. nt

[malaise]

3. I missed that one

He's a goner.

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. You've put your finger on precisely why the 2009 returns are crucial

In another post citing some blog posting, the writer used the fact that Romney had already disclosed the UBS account in his 2007 FEC filing as evidence AGAINST Romney partaking in the voluntary disclosure (i.e., amnesty) program. What that post studiously avoided, and you point out here, is that there are perfectly legitimate UBS wealth management accounts in the United States. They are run by UBS America and fully disclosed to the IRS under normal US banking rules. Now, it's certainly a good question why Romney would say anything about the UBS account in 2007 if it was a hidden Swiss bank, but I think he was playing the legal line on that very pivot: he was vague about whether it was a UBS account in Switzerland or a UBS America account (perfectly legitimate to have one of those). Once he was forced to enter the voluntary disclosure program - this speculation would go - he would come back in 2010 and "correct" the earlier filing - precisely because he was using a deceptive hedge on that earlier filing to obfuscate about whether it was an undisclosed UBS Switzerland account or a legitimate UBS America account.

So, then, the big question: why disclose it on the FEC form in 2007 at all? Romney was probably clear on the fact that he would not win in 2008, that it was McCain's turn, and that it was probably a Dem year anyway. he was always setting up for 2012. So, he wanted to keep a clean slate with the FEC, and he saw a way he could do it on the sly (by hedging the UBS entity). When he was forced to seek amnesty on the account, it was easy enough to go back and specify, and say "Oh, I had already declared it to the FEC." He future proofed his public election filings, and planned to keep his private IRS filings a secret. It's not that complicated, really.

[pnwmom]

6. I'm wondering if he had more than one of those UBS accounts. By acknowledging one,

he could appear to be on the up and up, and deflect suspicion, while he hid the others.

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. That's another possibility, but would require another scenario

[pnwmom]

8. Yup. There's more than one possibility, but they all make him

look guilty as hell.

That is, unless he produces his complete tax returns for a bunch of years and they all pass the smell test.

[Ilsa]

5. K&R.

Well thought-out and explained. He's toast. He needed and got tax amnesty. What a crook.