* A host of Republicans are planning to skip the state party’s $500 per person fundraiser featuring Sarah Palin next week, including GOP gubernatorial nominee Bill Brady…
Brady’s campaign won’t say why the candidate isn’t attending, only that he has no plans to be there.
GOP congressional candidates Randy Hultgren and Bob Dold aren’t gonna show, and neither will state Senators John Millner and Dan Duffy…
A photo with Palin could prove damaging to some Republicans running in suburban districts that have been trending more and more Democratic in recent elections, [Roosevelt University’s Paul Green] says.
And even for steadfast conservatives like Brady of Bloomington, there is little upside in publicly aligning himself with Palin even though he has been quietly making the rounds with suburban tea party groups for months.
* Speaking of Brady, the Northwest Herald was not happy with the gubernatorial candidate’s failure to provide copies of his tax returns…
His reluctance to release his tax records, however, was a poor decision, and the peek-a-boo nature of their release was an inadequate gesture for someone seeking the state’s highest office.
Brady wants to become the first elected Illinois governor in more than a decade who is not either in jail or under indictment. Secrecy is not a good way to start.
The more transparent the better. And besides, we just might learn something along the way.
* Finke focused on the non-payment issue…
It’s not that he did anything illegal. He just apparently took every advantage he could of the tax code written by the bad big government to reduce his tax obligation to zero.
Anyone who files a tax return does everything he or she can to minimize the tax hit. Most people, though, still end up paying something to the government. Even if you get a refund, it’s probably only for a small portion of the money withheld from your paycheck.
Quinn’s a populist from way back. It seems like he’s forever carped about giant corporations and fat cats and what have you. He shouldn’t have to break a sweat working Brady’s unique tax status into his campaign rhetoric
* And my syndicated newspaper column looked at it as well…
I was out with some political buddies the other night and the subject of Bill Brady’s taxes came up.
Just about everybody agreed that Brady should never have released his tax returns. All he did was make a bad situation worse, they said.
The Republican gubernatorial nominee released his returns four years ago when he ran for governor the first time. The returns showed he earned well into six figures and had lots of successful businesses. Nobody paid much attention at the time because Brady was an unknown state senator with little chance of winning the GOP nomination.
But when “tax day” came around this year, reporters asked the new nominee if he’d release his returns again. He said he wouldn’t, claiming that the last time his business suffered. Brady’s refusal sparked a few stories, but things really heated up when Gov. Pat Quinn stepped into the fray.
Quinn asked what Brady was hiding and demanded that Brady put the public interest before his private business interests. Brady eventually relented, but only to a point. He said he’d allow reporters to look at his returns for three hours that Friday afternoon in his Springfield campaign office. No copies would be distributed. Look only.
Chicago reporters were not amused. Not only would the returns be released 200 miles from their home base, but Brady had scheduled the unveiling around the same time that the family bank of Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias was going to be seized by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Brady was obviously trying to bury the story on a busy Friday, when it would get lost over the weekend.
Springfield-based reporters weren’t all that happy either. A glimpse of several years of complicated tax returns didn’t seem adequate.
But what we found was fascinating. Brady had declared so many losses on his businesses that he paid no state or federal income taxes at all for 2008 and no federal income taxes for 2009.
Also, the conservative Republican had used a tax break from President Barack Obama’s stimulus law to avoid paying federal taxes last year.
So, Brady was triple-troubled. He had most political reporters peeved at him and he handed them a story about not paying taxes on his state senate salary of about $75,000 a year. He had money to loan his campaign tens of thousands of dollars during that same time, but he chose instead to use a provision in the much-hated (by his Republican “base”) stimulus law to pay zero income tax.
So, instead of fading away into the weekend, the story kept going strong. Editorial boards and columnists weighed in. Reporters started combing through what they had for more tidbits, and in the meantime they wrote stories about Brady’s refusal to provide them with copies of his returns as Gov. Quinn had done. Something they haven’t written about yet is that Brady actually got a state income tax refund of more than $1,600 on what appears to be his withholding taxes on his Senate paychecks. Not good.
Brady told me last week that when his businesses started to wane as the economy tanked, he and his partners decided to go into the red rather than lay people off or shut down the companies. That’s honorable. If you have the cash to keep the businesses open, you should do what you can.
But Brady probably should’ve kicked a few bucks into the tax till for that legislative gig of his. At the very least, he should not have asked for a refund to bring his total tax bill down to zero. He had a right to the tax breaks he got, but he wasn’t required to do it.
Maybe my buddies were correct. Maybe Brady should’ve just mummed up and took the heat for not disclosing his returns. That story might’ve gone away in a few days. The resulting attack TV ad wouldn’t have been pleasant, but they would’ve been better than what we’ll see now: “Bill Brady funneled tens of thousands of dollars into his own campaign fund while he paid no income taxes on his legislative salary.” Oof.
Then again, I have to respect Brady for opening himself up to this hit, regardless of whether I agree with the rest of what he did. There’s no law (yet) requiring candidates to disclose their tax returns, but Brady swallowed hard and took his lumps. Now, if he’d just send us some actual copies of those returns …
Thoughts?
- Skeptical Cynic - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:18 am:
Does Heather Steans or Susan Garrett segregate their legislative salary from other sources of income to their family or the purpose of payiong taxes on it? I doubt it. The whole income tax return circus is silly. The media might care but I don’t believe voters do.
- Sent from my iPhone - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:21 am:
It’s all Arrow’s Theorem as we head to November.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:25 am:
SC, since both of those two make serious cash, I doubt there’s a problem with not paying income taxes on their legislative salaries. Your comment, therefore, didn’t make much sense. They also aren’t running statewide.
- Confused - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:29 am:
“But Brady probably should’ve kicked a few bucks into the tax till for that legislative gig of his”
Are you saying he should have voluntarily paid taxes beyond what he was required? Like a donation? I can think of better organizations to donate money to than the government (e.g. the Salvation Army). But to say that someone should pay more taxes than required by law doesn’t make sense. People who actually run a business know that some years will be good and some will be bad. And the writers of the tax code know this as well. Allowing losses to reduce taxes owed serves to help keep a business open during tough times instead of closing. It smooths out the year-to-year fluctuations. You even indicated that it was “honorable” for him to go into the red and keep the business open.
I am almost certain that most business owners would rather have a successful year and have to pay more taxes, than to have a bad year and not have to pay any.
If you don’t think it’s fair that he didn’t have to pay any taxes, don’t blame him, as if he did something wrong. Lobby to get the tax code changed!
- VanillaMan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:32 am:
If it is going to continue to be a mean election season, attack ads like the ones you are describing won’t have as much bite as they had earlier. We’re going to see Rod Blagojevich, Roland Burris and Tony Rezko’s face every twenty minutes. Voters are going to see them all going to Broadway Bank, selling a US Senate seat, and bankrupting Illinois. We’re going to hear a whole lot worse than this, and I believe voters motivated to vote this election are expecting the current regime in Springfield to fight for their political lives, and say anything to remain in office.
Considering the crap coming this summer and fall, this issue remains a kerfuffle, entertaining only those of us who care.
- Small Town Liberal - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:32 am:
- The media might care but I don’t believe voters do. -
Yeah, because the media doesn’t have any interest in running stories that attract peoples attention. If voters evaluated everything on its merit, media bias wouldn’t be an issue.
- Skeptical Cynic - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:33 am:
Weren’t some of Brady’s detractors saying he should at least pay income tax on his legislative salary? In effect segregate legislative salary from other forms of income for the purpose of paying taxes on it?
- shore - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:33 am:
Not every story here I think is as big a deal as it gets made out to be here only because most people in the north burbs dont care about springfield. This I think might have a chance only because politician who didnt pay his taxes is easy to understand.
- VanillaMan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:35 am:
And no one in Illinois running for public office is going to want Palin around. It doesn’t matter how many of her millions of supporters she brings, she is building her own network and she is still too hot to handle in Barack Obama’s home state.
- Just Wondering - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:43 am:
=Are you saying he should have voluntarily paid taxes beyond what he was required? Like a donation? I can think of better organizations to donate money to than the government (e.g. the Salvation Army). But to say that someone should pay more taxes than required by law doesn’t make sense.=
Brady is not just any ordinary businessman. He’s a businessman running for governor of a state in the midst of a financial crisis.
- John Powers - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:48 am:
Brady, and everyone else, pays FICA, property tax, sales tax, gasoline tax, telephone tax….regardless of the profitability of his business.
JBP
- Confused - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:57 am:
==Brady is not just any ordinary businessman. He’s a businessman running for governor of a state in the midst of a financial crisis.==
So was he supposed to use the alternate set of tax codes that were set up for a businessman running for governor? Oh wait, there is just one code that we all use, regardless of political aspirations. Again, he did not break any laws. If you don’t think it’s fair that he was able to count his losses as losses, then call your legislators to urge a change to the tax code. I’m personally all for a simplified flat tax of some sort. But until then, I don’t blame a person for taking every advantage of the tax code that they can. By the way, how much extra taxes did you voluntarily kick in last year. So why should he?
- Greg B. - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:58 am:
It won’t be an issue.
- Logical Thinker - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:03 am:
I love how Rich writes on Friday about the feeding frenzy on Alexi and his issues saying that it’s unfair to pile on him after the issue has come out.
Then today he continues the feeding frenzy on Brady’s issue which also has already come out.
Let’s see if I have this straight: Brady does nothing wrong, takes losses on his taxes (like the code allows) and is subject to more scrutiny. Whereas, Alexi’s bank fails, his family takes $147 Million out over 8 years, the FDIC comes in to the tune of $394 Million and that story is supposed to go away?
Right. Got it!
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:08 am:
LT, the answer you seek is simple. I don’t see the deliberate attempt to mislead by the media on this issue.
- just sayin' - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:10 am:
The kneejerk response from the Brady camp is always, “What’s he supposed to do, pay taxes when he doesn’t owe any?”
Yes, damn straight. That’s exactly what he should have done. Tax dollars pay his salary. And he’s voted for plenty of bills that cost all of us more money (like his votes giving state benefits to illegal immigrants).
The least he can do is put something into the pot to offset just a small part of his drag on the rest of us.
What did he spend to attend the Kentucky Derby and related festivities this weekend? Easily a grand or more probably? A smarter politician would have paid at least that much in taxes, as opposed to nothing.
- Downstate GOP Faithless - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:11 am:
I get the way it was handled may not have been the best way, but the idea that he should be punished for not paying taxes when he was not required to is a bit much.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:13 am:
===but the idea that he should be punished===
Several accurate stories/columns/etc. is being punished? Really?
- Captain Flume - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:17 am:
“…They also aren’t running statewide.”
Any candidate that is running for an office that has a vote on statewide issues needs to be scrutinized for what impact he or she may have on statewide policies and fitness for office, unless we want to change the law so that a senator or representative is allowed to vote only on issues that affect solely his or her district. Legislators are paid from state funds, not district funds, and by that alone their conduct and fitness for office should be the concern of all voters.
- Pelon - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:19 am:
So now we expect candidates for public office to not only disclose private tax information, but also pay more tax than the law requires?
This “issue” says less about Brady than it does about the media’s ignorance of taxation.
- John Powers - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:20 am:
Rich,
Why don’t you ask Bill if he would have rather made $373,650 and been in the top tax bracket, or lost money and paid no taxes?
You seem to be marketing the story that there is some type of crafty scheme to lose money that businesses use to avoid taxes.
If so, we must have had an explosion in brilliant businessmen over the last two years, as so many businesses lost money.
JBP
- Montrose - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:21 am:
All the Brady backers that are saying “he followed the tax code so this is a non-issue” are failing to grasp the political implications. You need accept following the letter of the law does not matter on this issue. Brady’s camp using that as its response to this issue is a non-starter.
It is about appearances. That is what politics are about. Having paid no taxes on a government salary when the profile you are trying to build is that you are for smaller, more responsible government is not good, especially when your ability to avoid taxes came from a stimulus package you are against. This is why it is an issue. The Brady folks need to come up with a more savvy response to deal with this reality.
- another angle - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:22 am:
Brady is obviously having trouble running a business and being a state official.
So maybe he shouldn’t be a state official, and instead focus on trying to save his failing business.
- John Powers - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:26 am:
Yeah, but the appearances are driven by the media who would ignore tax accounting to hack at a candidate. You pay taxes on Net Income, not on Gross Income. It is a fact, not a loophole.
Brady (and everyone else who works for salary) paid at least 13.5% in taxes regardless of their other business profitability.
JBP
- Confused - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:28 am:
“kneejerk response”? There’s nothing kneejerk about it. It’s a reasonable, logical response.
Again, he’s following the law. The fact that YOU don’t think it’s fair means that YOU should be trying to get the tax laws changed. Not whining because it APPEARS to give someone else a break one year. And don’t forget that he paid plenty of taxes in the years his business did well. Does that not “count” toward his contribution back to the government? It’s the nature of business. Ups and downs. So please try to understand how it works before giving YOUR kneejerk response.
- steve schnorf - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:29 am:
This shouldn’t be an issue, and it’s going to be. Read the comments here, and this site’s commenters are far above the state-wide average in intelligence. It’s not fair, but that’s the way it is.
Rich, re other potentially wealthy non-payers: it will depend a lot on where they get their income, not necessarily how much. If a lot of it is return from investments, capital gains, profits/losses from S corps, LLCs, etc, and relatively little from their paycheck, there may be more people than you think in the no federal tax situation for 2008 and 2009.
- Amalia - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:29 am:
Brady not going to the Palin event. Maybe she’s not conservative
enough for him, cause he’s pretty far right.
- Brennan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:30 am:
I’d like to know which reporter brought their own tax forms to the Brady tax viewing and copied what they were viewing.
Why didn’t they all do that?
- imeanreally - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:31 am:
He and his “partners” CHOSE to go into the red in order to avoid laying off employees? Wait a second…last I heard he had 9 of his 34 employees still on staff. That’s straight from Shady’s own campaign. I can appreciate his campaign trying to spin this to a positive and telling the people that this is a guy who took one for the team…but come on. Really? Dude, you cut 25 of your 34 employees. Tell the spin doctors to go back to the white board on that story please.
At the very least, Shady should say nothing more on the issue at all. Every time he opens his mouth he gives Quinn more ammo. Open mouth, insert foot, leave it there.
- George - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:33 am:
I don’t care whether he paid $0 in taxes.
The problem is him running around talking about how income taxes are too high and then we find out he is actually not paying any income taxes.
The other way this will get play is the image of the “businessman” who’s business is failing saying he wants to bring his business skills to run government.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:36 am:
===You seem to be marketing the story that there is some type of crafty scheme to lose money that businesses use to avoid taxes. ===
Where, exactly, do you see that in the column?
- Cook County R - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:36 am:
Ya ” just saying” i am sure you took no deductions, and did not take advantage of any of the tax breaks available. He should throw it in just because ,Is this a joke? As a struggling business owner i understand He is a businessman is trying to keep his business alive in the worst financial catastrophe since the great depression. He should have just given money to the inefficient government we have today that he wasn’t required to are you nuts? You are right he should have laid off an employee and paid more taxes than necessary. How many people do you employ in your community? Throwing money to the government is a great idea in this economy.
next, he gets paid by tax payer dollars so he should throw more in than he owes. Well then I think every city worker, alderman, cop and firefighter should have a higher income taxt than any private sector employee because they are paid by tax dollars.
That is the business and finance savvy that got this state in the financial mess it is in now.
Im not a brady supporter outright but I’d rather have a business man who has survived than quinn who has lived off the taxpayers his whole life.
- wordslinger - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:40 am:
–And no one in Illinois running for public office is going to want Palin around. It doesn’t matter how many of her millions of supporters she brings, she is building her own network and she is still too hot to handle in Barack Obama’s home state.–
Kirk wanted her to say nice things about him a few months ago. She made a point not to.
For the record, she’s not too hot to handle — anywhere.
Sarah’s going to make a nice payday on the Angry Circuit for a while. Then she’ll fall into one of Mr. Lincoln’s categories — I’m guessing “some of the people all of the time.”
By the way, Pres. Obama gave an outstanding speech at the commencement in Ann Arbor over the weekend on civility in political discourse. The dude can put it down, and I’m picking it up.
In that spirit, I will no longer use the phrase right-wingnut. I’ll just stick to the non-partisan “yabbo” a UK soccer phrase to describe hostile and ignorant.
- John Powers - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:41 am:
Rich
“But Brady probably should’ve kicked a few bucks into the tax till for that legislative gig of his. At the very least, he should not have asked for a refund to bring his total tax bill down to zero. He had a right to the tax breaks he got, but he wasn’t required to do it.”
You are making a bold accusation there that everyone should pay taxes per some unknown accounting system rather than the one we have.
JBP
- Pelon - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:41 am:
“This shouldn’t be an issue, and it’s going to be. Read the comments here, and this site’s commenters are far above the state-wide average in intelligence. It’s not fair, but that’s the way it is.”
This site is not a very good representation of the average voter. There are too many partisans and insiders. If Brady was a Democrat, a good many posters would have a different view. I doubt the average undecided voter will care much about this.
“The problem is him running around talking about how income taxes are too high and then we find out he is actually not paying any income taxes.”
It would only be a problem if he said HIS taxes were too high. You don’t have to pay a lot of taxes to think they are too high. In fact, if someone isn’t paying taxes, they have less to gain by reducing them.
- VanillaMan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:43 am:
All the Brady backers that are saying “he followed the tax code so this is a non-issue” are failing to grasp the political implications….It is about appearances. That is what politics are about.
2010 is already different from typical elections. In this day and age of poll tracking, we haven’t seen polls like this before. Politics isn’t the same this year.
Consequentially, incumbants appear severely handicapped and challengers have won elections they wouldn’t normally win. There is a mood this political year that seems to show that what used to work in the big political spin machine, isn’t. The Big Bully Pulpit hasn’t worked in a year. Traditional media is losing readers and viewers. 2010 is turning out to be a year where typical spin seeems to be ignored by a very determined and motivated electorate.
There also seems to be a very high level of cynicism. In Illinois, which has suffered under two infamous governors, a conservative state senator from Bloomington has been shocking polls. Even his supporters have to be a bit surprised by this information. After reading for two months, I’m left with little else than hunches why this is happening because my gut is saying that voters are incredibly cynical and are demanding incumbant’s heads, but I prefer gut-less analysis.
Since 2009, voters seem to have stopped buying spin from the status quo incumbants. Voter’s cynicism and mistrust are not just giving an edge to challengers this year, in that it seems to be innoculating them from bad media stories as well.
So this negative spin against Brady isn’t hurting him as it would have in the past.
- Aldyth - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:52 am:
Depending on how good a job Quinn’s people do with their spin job, Brady’s taxes could be an issue in the fall. Most voters don’t delve into the details nearly as much as they should. The right snappy remark about Brady’s failure to contribute to the well-being of the state by paying no income taxes and you now have a sound bite that gets played on the news broadcasts. That will get the voters’ attentiion.
- jonbtuba - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:00 am:
If trust and transparency are to be important issues in this election, than the tax issue puts Brady in a lot of trouble. Clearly he thought no one would care about his returns, which makes me question his political judgment.
- N'ville - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:03 am:
Rich, Do you have a comparison of charitable contributions between Quinn and Brady? If Brady didn’t choose to throw extra $$ to government, how did he do with charities compared to Quinn?
- just sayin' - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:09 am:
“Again, he’s following the law. The fact that YOU don’t think it’s fair means that YOU should be trying to get the tax laws changed.”
No, I’ve got a better idea. I think I just won’t vote for him.
By his own admission, Brady’s having trouble running a profitable business. He shouldn’t be running for office at all if the only thing his business can produce is tax deductions and lay offs.
Even Alexi G. got out of the banking business 4 years ago. At least he focused on his duties as a public official when he got the treasurer’s gig.
- The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:14 am:
===
Kirk wanted her to say nice things about him a few months ago. She made a point not to.
===
That’s not entirely true. I believe Sarah did say something–”unsolicited”–on Twitter a while back about “appreciating” Kirk’s position on Guantanamo Bay.
- Cincinnatus - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:18 am:
Everyone should quit grousing.
If you want financial disclosures from candidates - CHANGE THE LAW
If you don’t like the loopholes in the IRS code, don’t blame Brady - CHANGE THE LAW
- Confused - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:22 am:
==He had a right to the tax breaks he got, but he wasn’t required to do it.==
Actually, he was require to. There’s a little phrase above the signature line of the tax form that reads “Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, they are true, correct, and complete”.
So leaving out information to voluntarily pay extra taxes is just as illegal is omitting information to avoid paying taxes. I suppose he could have made a voluntary contribution to reduce the national debt. But that wouldn’t matter as the spin would still be that he didn’t pay any taxes. He’s actually in a tough situation because there are people who will actually believe the implication that he did something wrong to avoid paying taxes. As always, it will come down to whose negative ads are more effective.
- just sayin' - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:36 am:
“So leaving out information to voluntarily pay extra taxes is just as illegal is omitting information to avoid paying taxes.”
That’s just absurd. There are a million ways to shelter income. Not everyone relies on accountants and lawyers to reduce taxes paid by the most aggressive means possible. And certainly no law required Brady to make use of the Obama stimulus benefits, the same Obama stimulus plan that Brady says was such a bad idea.
I wonder if there is even one other member of the general assembly who didn’t pay at least something back to the state treasury in taxes.
- wordslinger - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:36 am:
–So leaving out information to voluntarily pay extra taxes is just as illegal is omitting information to avoid paying taxes.–
LOL. That is just so much BS, dude. Check out every presidential candidates tax returns since Nixon. They all pay and pay and pay.
Do you think the Bushes took advantage of every tax break? No way. They were much smarter politicians. It was a cost of doing business.
That’s just life in the NFL. Brady should have seen this coming months ago.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:38 am:
===presidential candidates tax returns since Nixon. They all pay and pay===
Tricky Dick didn’t pay one year, I think, and got into a load of trouble.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:40 am:
===Actually, he was require to.===
Um, no, he wasn’t.
- ShadyBillBrady - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:45 am:
Brennan, we’re not talking a 1040-EZ here … three hours would barely be enough time to look through the stack of forms, schedule C’s, etc. and take some notes … no way they would have had enough time to copy all the information onto blank forms.
Brady’s Backers all feel like the media should be using kid gloves on this. Why? Because that’s what they are used to. Billy has been able to schmoose his local press for so long, mainly because he’s powerful and connected in the community and unchallenged for most of his career as a politician.
He’s on a different state now. He’s under a bigger spotlight.
And most of us, when we read about these things, are left wondering “who is the real Bill Brady?” … and he’s not doing himself any favors when he tries to answer that question with more secrecy, more shiftiness …
- ShadyBillBrady - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:51 am:
And, regarding the Palin event … this is more trouble for Brady.
Recently Bill publicly said he was interested in Palin’s endorsement. Now, he won’t even attend the the event in Rosemont. The kicker? The campaign response … they won’t tell why he won’t be there, just that he won’t be.
Yep, that should definitely keep anyone from asking more or digging deeper. Transparency at its finest.
- Tom Joad - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:58 am:
The big difference with this issue is that every voter will have an opinion on it. It boils down to Brady had a state salary but used our tax money (the stimulus cash) to give himself a tax break most voters can not get. That is not fair to most voters.
This will make for great campaign ads for all Democrats, not just Quinn.
- Rambler - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:02 pm:
I recall that some blogmaster said this last week:
“So, since Quinn has loudly demanded that Brady distribute copies of his tax returns, I’d like to suggest that the governor ought to release all of his own tax returns dating back to the first time he took an interest payment from his campaign account. It’s only fair.”
Evidently when it came time to write the column, the decision was made to stick to the partisan theme.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:03 pm:
===the decision was made to stick to the partisan theme. ===
Bite me.
There are only so many words in a column and so much stuff you can do with it. Plus, there’s plenty of time before election day.
- former springfield resident - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:22 pm:
Any reason for deleting my comment?
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:24 pm:
Don’t remember what it was, but you should probably look at that stuff in red type before commenting again.
- Rambler - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:35 pm:
I guess it’s a badge of honor to join the ranks of the “bite me” recipients.
- Ghost - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:52 pm:
The GOP keps saying that IL taxes are unfair to business and stifle growth, therefore no new taxes on folks making over 250k a year etc.
now lets look at Bill Brady, his business has not been stiffled by IL tax law, in fact he has been able to use IL tax law for his business to elimnate payn any taxes at all…and instead generate a check back from the Government! Our taxes do not appear unfriednly to business afterall.
Then Brady has cash on hand to loan himself 6 figures…. but is opposed o a tax system targeted at people brinin in over 250k, who it looks like may similarily be using the current tax code to limit or elminate what they pay anyway.
This onvinces me that the current tax code is not unfaily hittin the successful, it is unfaily sheltering them.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:54 pm:
Ghost, time to invest in a new keyboard, methinks.
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:59 pm:
A big reason for Brady’s trouble with this is that his tax return does not match his rhetoric. A big part of his case against raising taxes is that businesses cannot afford higher taxes in these tough economic times. His return shows why this is not the case. A suffering business doesn’t pay taxes. So if the income tax rate were increased from 3 to 5% Bill Brady would still have paid…
wait for it…
nothing.
- CircularFiringSquad - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:02 pm:
CommandoKirk wanted CaribouBarbie at his side and still does. Congressman Schock and Sen. Rutherford were all in with her a few weeks ago. So this must be NoTaxBill thinking he will look less wingnutish by staying away.
Of course will just continue to badger him about
it
- Confused - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:04 pm:
==That’s just absurd. There are a million ways to shelter income.==
You chose to miss my point completely so that you could continue to whine. Losing money in a business is not a tax shelter. It’s not like he used some sneaky but legal way to avoid paying taxes. His business lost money and he accounted for it on the return. I ackowledge that there are lots of different legal ways to treat various tax situations. But you’re suggesting that he should have voluntarily chosen a method that resulted in higher taxes. Why would anyone do that? THAT would be absurd!
- Cincinnatus - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:09 pm:
If any commenter on this blog does not deduct his home loan interest, he would be foolish. Similarly, if Brady did not take a legal deduction when he was eligible, he would also be foolish in my book.
The complainers on this board should more rightly single out the arcane and obnoxious IRS code as the object of their assaults. FLAT TAX anyone?
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:12 pm:
Cincinnatus, we have a flat tax in Illinois.
- Bill - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:23 pm:
== this site’s commenters are far above the state-wide average in intelligence.==
Don’t get carried away, Steve.
- Yiddish Cowboy - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:41 pm:
No way this should be an issue. Brady did nothing illegal or unethical. Not that my single opinion matters, but nonetheless I think less of Pat Quinn for making this an issue. I work hard for my money, as do others. As a result, I want to save as much money as possible and take advantage of any current tax laws to decrease my tax liability. That’s human nature. Simply put: Brady did nothing illegal, unethical or improper. Let’s move on.
- Bill - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:46 pm:
My my! The Captain is somewhat testy today even to the point of administering the dreaded bite me. Could it be that he has once again had his vacation plans thwarted by the threat of a Quinn budget veto?
- Cincinnatus - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:47 pm:
Illinois tax is based off the results of your Federal 1040, Rich. Since I haven’t seen Brady’s returns, I assumed the commenters are talking about deductions made on his Federal forms
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:47 pm:
Two “Bite me’s” today, Bill. Not just one.
- George - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:51 pm:
Is it appropriate to say that Brady would have gotten a tax cut under Quinn’s originally-proposed tax plan?
- George - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:52 pm:
Cincinnatus - your Illinois tax is based on your Federal AGI.
That’s your adjusted income BEFORE your deductions.
- Cincinnatus - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:29 pm:
Just call me Tim Geithner from now on…
- Ghost - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:46 pm:
I have most of the keys! waiting for Quinn to get a new breifcase first….
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:49 pm:
==Simply put: Brady did nothing illegal, unethical or improper. Let’s move on. ==
I’ll move on when Brady stops suggesting that higher taxes are unthinkable when businesses are hurting in a recession. His returns illustrate why this is not the case. He either knows this to be untrue OR he is not very smart.
- Little Egypt - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 3:16 pm:
Y’all can say what you want; however, I believe this will become a BIG campaign issue as November draws closer. Whether he shoulda, coulda or woulda paid taxes will come up in every conceivable way by the Dems. I thought the Dems might lose big in November but I believe Brady just gave them a reprieve - especially for the office of Governor.
- rudy - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 3:31 pm:
Hey, all you voters…
You all wanna be like me.
First I’ll cut your taxes, just like mine
Then we can pay to play for free.
Don’t you cry for me, Illinois.
- Michelle Flaherty - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 3:42 pm:
the solution to all of this?
Gross receipts tax
Rod was right all along.
Can i get an amen, Bill?
- Bill - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 5:10 pm:
Amen, Michelle.
- quincy - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:25 pm:
here we go again unother repiblican not paying his taxes. Like the song goes THE POOR MAN PAYS THE BAND WHILE THE RICH MAN DANCES
- ourMagician - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 10:14 pm:
Like most real estate investors, his taxes are a complicated mess with depreciation costs, k-1’s, TIF grants from municipalities etc… A 3 hour look doesn’t satisfy anyone, in fact, if the good Senator himself looked at them for 3 hours, he still wouldn’t have a clue what they said.
- Rob N - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:08 pm:
Brennan quips, “I’d like to know which reporter brought their own tax forms to the Brady tax viewing and copied what they were viewing. Why didn’t they all do that?”
Pictures (or scans) would’ve been worth 1000 newspaper columns. Maybe the notes the reporters did take will be still.
And for the haters - Rich is exactly right. He’s been harping on Quinn over virtually the same issue (returns available for media review) for about as long as he’s been discussing the media’s lack of interest in Brady’s unethical (even if legal) tax avoidance shell game.
- Yawwwnnn - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:19 pm:
Don’t like Brady not paying taxes change the tax laws, That is the issue, not the one that follows the tax laws
- Leatherneck318 - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:37 pm:
Nothing illegal done by Brady re: taxes, and here the Democrats are seizing on the issue like they’ve found the world’s only surving unicorn. Just wait until the attack ads start flying around, and Blago starts singing like the well-coiffed canary he is; the entire “Brady should have paid taxes even though, because, uh…well, you see….” argument won’t hold water.
Gotta love it - quoting Bill Hader as James Carville…”Y’all are like a fat woman in a milkshake shop - your grasping @ straws!”
- downstater II - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 6:39 am:
Hey !!!! It’s time for another episode of the “Bill Brady Show” where the “contributors” here {who don’t really know Brady including the host} try to second guess him, find more fault & speculate on his “motives” & next move. Again, he’s the GOP nominee & if you don’t like him vote for Quinn or perhaps Cohen if he gets on the ballot. As to not attending a Palin event ?….so what ? She’s becoming more a celebrity along the lines of Paris Hilton than a serious political figure. Hmmm? maybe as candidate for governor he’s got a few stops or events of his own to contend with.
- downstater II - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 7:20 am:
It’s also amazing that the good old IRS & the Illinois Dept. of Revenue seem satisfied with Brady’s returns. Apparently they don’t read the blogs. In terms of how his business{s} are set-up it & the cumulative income is handled ; it appears all aspects of his business are legit. His salary may in fact be included into the overall income. Don’t remember reading anything about problems with any Brady businesses in recent history. People are just generally PO’d when they can’t “dig” into the personal business of others. He put out more info than most would have. Business’ all over Illinois are having a tough time so what makes Brady’s business & interests exempt? He must be managing as are his partners as he & they are still in business albeit a smaller operation. They appear to be paying they’re bills & staying “afloat” in a very tough business climate that is especially bad in Illinois. Hell…the state is having a tough time of it. Anyone remember the 80’s ? Got to wonder what he & his company have paid in fuel tax, sales tax, pay-roll taxes, property taxes, franchising fees, corporate renewals, license renewals ect., ect.
- imeanreally - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 8:45 am:
downstater II said: “Hey !!!! It’s time for another episode of the “Bill Brady Show” where the “contributors” here {who don’t really know Brady including the host} try to second guess him, find more fault & speculate on his “motives” & next move.”
Some of us have known Billy for years. It isn’t our lack of knowledge which leads us to question him…it’s our abundant experience with the shady dealings and questionable judgement. Some of us speak with such certainty regarding Shady Billy Brady because we know him personally and know how scary it is that he may actually lead this state.
But excellent effort at deflection. You betcha!
- ShadyBillBrady - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 9:19 am:
Funny stuff Downstater II. I actually know Billy quite well. Too well in fact. The problem is that those of us who do know him are afraid that the voters in Illinois don’t know him well enough yet, and we think it’s important they get to know him and he has to answer the tough questions.
And your argument about why he is not attending the Palin event would be more meaningful if he had not just weeks ago gotten giddy when asked if he’d be looking for her endorsement. And if the reason he is not attending is because he has events of his own … why didn’t the campaign say “He can’t be there because he has an event” instead of he can’t be there but we won’t tell you why?
- downstater II - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 6:19 pm:
Hey , it’s what makes this blog great & we’re all certainly entitled to our opinions or express views. As to deflection…not really , at least from me. This income tax/ tax return thing, what will he do with his business thing is starting to turn into a mini-series. Still think Palin’s celebrity is becoming “Paris Hilton” like.