COMMENTARY | The tax issue is something Mitt Romney has been accused of avoiding for quite some time. On Jan. 24, he finally revealed his returns. They confirmed what everyone already knew: Mitt Romney makes more than most people and is taxed at a lower rate.
The IRS explains that “tax rates that apply to net capital gain are generally lower than the tax rates that apply to other income. For 2010, the maximum capital gains rate for most people is 15 percent. ” For Romney, that number was less than 14 percent; he paid $3 million on $21.7 million he received in mostly investment income.
His father was also a wealthy man, but he was more forthcoming than Mitt has been in providing his financial records while vying for the Republican nomination in 1968. George Romney, in what USA Today reports was a “move without precedent in American politics” at the time, voluntarily disclosed 12 years worth of records when he ran for president in 1968.
Unlike his son, the American Motors President was not accused of being a “vulture capitalist.” He actually saved the company from bankruptcy and got millions through stock options. He did, however, lose the Republican nomination that year to Richard Nixon. Perhaps his loss is why Mitt Romney is only providing two years worth of tax returns.
An Associated Press examination of Romney’s financial records identified at least six funds set up in the Cayman Islands totaling more than $32 million. A 2010 Congressional Research Report on tax havens revealed that “the annual cost of offshore tax abuses may be around $100 billion per year.” The same report lists the Cayman Islands as one of the known tax havens. There is no indication that Romney’s Cayman accounts are abusive of our tax system.
However, there are plenty of reasons to think he might not be able to relate to the average American who considers $374,000 quite a bit of money, who pays almost double what he pays in taxes and who isn’t in favor of just letting the housing market bottom out. I can’t, in good conscience, give my vote to someone who has no idea what it’s like to actually have to value money, to someone who would squander ten grand on a bet. And I won’t be voting for Romney.
We desperately need our economy to improve, and the only candidates who will get my vote are those who understand that money does matter. Yes, wealth can be measured through children, as Mrs. Romney points out. (It’s assumed that she wasn’t referring to tax credits.) However, children are like offshore accounts; if you run out of money to invest in them, they can dwindle away to nothing.
My biggest concern about Romney is that he’s the multi-millionaire son of a millionaire, both of whom had interest in being the President of the United States. I worry that he can’t relate to everyday Americans enough to make good decisions on behalf of the majority who aren’t wealthy.
In these tumultuous economic times, we need someone whose greatest desire is to help turn things around for the majority who are struggling. I’m just not convinced that Romney is the man to make that happen.