I know, this might not be the most “popular” post, and I’m far from a Mitt Romney fan, believe me. That being said, am I the only one that finds it a bit over the top to criticize him for paying 15% of taxes. He’s not the one that put in place tax incentives and tax breaks. Sure, you could blame him for voting against repealing those tax breaks while being in favor of others. Clearly, guys like him are probably not the ones that should be able to escape tax increases in the coming years.
That being said, if possible, please set aside that part of the debate. Let’s only talk about the fact that there is outrage all over the country over the fact that Mitt Romney has been paying less than 15% of taxes on his income in the past 2 years despite being in that “1% group”.
It’s sad to say but there are countless ways to legally avoid paying taxes. With the internationalization, it is becoming much easier for companies to pay almost no taxes as has been discussed in some of my previous posts. As individuals become richer, their income and tax situation can easily become similar to what companies are able to do. I’m not saying it’s fair but it’s the way things are. Until we admit that fact, we’ll be stuck arguing on details. Are there solutions? Yes. But they’re not easy at all.
Mitt Romney is paying less than 15% on his taxes. What does that prove? That he was smart enough to get help to legally diminish the amount of taxes that he paid.
Wouldn’t You Do The Same?
I mean honestly, if you have 2 stocks, one that pays high dividends and another that will accumulate capital gains, you’d be smart to put the one that pays dividends in a tax deferred account such as a 401K or a RRSP (in Canada). That would be the smart thing to do. Trying to get all possible deductions that you are allowed under the tax code is also SMART.
I mean seriously, when is the last time you passed on a deduction in order to do “your fair share”?
“Yes, But He’s Rich”
That would be the common argument. Sure, Mitt Romney is rich. But chances are that you are also much richer than the average American. At what point should you “stop looking for ways to improve your bottom line”? I’m not talking about acting illegally or anything like that. At what point? When you make $50,000/year? 100K? 200K? $1 million? There is no clear answer of course.
Mitt Romney Has Many Issues To Defend
However, I don’t see paying few taxes as being one of them. It simply proves that he is smart and plays by the rule.
Tax Efficiency Is Too Often Overlooked
I personally think that being tax efficient is critical over time and makes a huge difference. Why so many investors spend tons of time on asset allocation, commissions, fees for funds/ETF’s and other areas without even spending a few hours to optimize their tax expenses blows me away. It can end up making a tremendous difference.
Any thoughts on all of this? Am I way off in your opinion?




With the Super Bowl a few days away, many of us fans are wondering how we would ever pay for Super Bowl tickets. 




Zuckerberg On Top Of The World?
Zuckerberg, who is yet to turn 30 will likely officially become the 9th richest man in the world once Facebook goes public. Believe me, I will be discussing the Facebook IPO and what I think about buying the shares (most already know my opinion) but today I simply wanted to talk about Mark Zuckerberg.
The guy has been able to build one of the most important companies in the world from his dorm in Harvard and looks as determined as ever to take Facebook to the top.
It’s Not About The Money
You might think that no one becomes this rich without being driven by money, by its power and by the though of passing by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett in the top rankings. I think it’s becoming more clear every day that Zuckerberg was not about the money.
Sure, you could say that it’s easy for him now. He announced he would be making $1 per year, exactly the same as Steve Jobs who seemed to mentor the Facebook founder in the later years of his life and actually said he had a lot of respect for the guy that wouldn’t sell out unlike others he had accused of doing so (Bill Gates would be the main guy). So clearly, Zuckerberg is not motivated by money these days. He also pushed off his IPO much longer than most would have and has signed the giving pledge, promising to give away at least half of his fortune.
It Never Was In Fact
Sure, you might say that it’s easy to forgo getting a salary of a few million dollars when you’re worth billions. I don’t think ,any would have been to resist selling their stakes in the earlier years. Imagine yourself being offered millions, then tens of millions and even hundreds of millions while you are still barely able to afford your own place. Props to Zuckerberg for resisting. Just take a look at founders of other companies such as Google. By the time those companies turned public, the founders barely had a few % of the company. Zuckerberg has almost 30%!!! If you saw the “Social Network” movie, you might think that he was able to accomplish that through dishonest tactics. Some parts are unclear of course but I think that overall, what he was able to do is impressive.
One of the big critics that Facebook faces when being compared with Google is that revenues are much lower than Google at the same stage and revenue growth as well. That is more than fair. I will discuss my opinion on why that is soon but the basic story is that Facebook still to this day probably does not spend much time on revenues and monetization. A few years from now, I expect many more companies like Zynga (ZNGA) to build a business model centered around Facebook.
I also think one recent move by Zuckerberg, the hire of Sheryl Sandberg, says a lot about him. This woman is exceptional, well liked and a strong leader. That is one more proof that Zuck is after improving his product, not acting in his self-interest. Many leaders would hesitate to put such a high profile leader next to them.
Clearly Not Perfect
It has been well discussed that Zuckerberg and Facebook had many privacy issues, especially in the earlier times of the company. Even recently, changes were done to the company that created a stir among users. There was also that now famous “meltdown” when Zuck was interviewed about privacy concerns at Facebook. But I don’t think anyone would argue that he has gotten much better at his position and at dealing with the media, users, etc. He’s not perfect, but I would argue that he is the perfect leader for Facebook as it moves towards its IPO.
Do you think Facebook is in a good position?