On 21 Aug 2012 12:49:30 GMT, Han wrote:




Two for instances.
Romney has amassed over 100 million in an IRA. Supposedly IRAs are
limited to something like $6000/year in contributions. Not sure when the
IRA system was started, but let's say for argument's sake 45 years ago.
That would mean (if I am correct) that Romney's 45x$6000 or $270,000 had
a phenomenal yield. But then, he could have transferred more than
$6000/year?

Romney has large amounts of capital off-shore. Theoretically that money
could be in use to support the US economy. Is it?

In other words, if this is legal, is it right?

Why not? If it is legal, it was deemed right by the lawmakers. If
Romney or others want to give money away, fine, but that should be
their decision, not mine and yours.

Wish I could remember the details of a 60 Minutes piece asking about
some corporations with operations off shore. They would bring them
back of the tax rate was lower. We accept nothing over a lower
percentage of billions.

Our tax code is terrible and should be tossed out. The code should be
re-written and no more than three pages long. Problem is, that would
put many accountants and lawyers out of work.