Posts Tagged ‘richard painter’
Richard Painter: 7 Billlion Tax Bill
on Monday, May 1, 2017Richard Painter Money Quote saying about Robert Mercer that he got Trump elected and asking whether that will lead to a IRS commissioner that will pursue existing 7 billion dollar taxes case against Mercer. Richard Painter said:
“Are we going to have a commissioner of the IRS who aggressively enforces the law and takes good cases to Tax Court or (somebody who) just throws away tax cases so billionaires don’t have to pay their taxes and the rest of us can pay more taxes?” — Richard Painter
Share the Richard Painter Money quote image above on your site:
Short Link to this Quote:
Richard Painter is raising concerns about whether the new commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will fairly enforce tax laws.
Painter questions if the commissioner will aggressively pursue tax cases against wealthy individuals and large corporations in Tax Court to ensure they pay what they owe, or will dismiss valid cases so that billionaires do not have to pay their fair share of taxes. This would mean the tax burden shifts more to average citizens.
By framing it as a choice between fair enforcement or letting some avoid taxes, Painter appears to believe the IRS commissioner should apply tax laws equally and without favoritism, regardless of a taxpayer’s wealth or influence.
Richard Painter: Foreign Governments Cash
on Sunday, January 15, 2017Richard Painter Money Quote saying that donald trump will be in violation of the emoluments clause of the constitution on the day he takes office if he doesn’t divest from his businesses and that his mixing of money with politics put us at risk. Richard Painter said:
“[Trump] will be in violation of the constitution. The founders knew that foreign governments would try to meddle in our elections, meddle in our politics and they did not want any foreign government money coming to anyone holding a position of trust with our government” — Richard Painter
Share the Richard Painter Money quote image above on your site:
Short Link to this Quote:
Richard Painter is saying that if President Trump does not fully divest from his business interests, then he will be in violation of the Constitution specifically regarding the Emoluments Clause.
Painter notes that the founders were concerned about foreign governments trying to influence American politics, such as through providing money to elected officials. According to Painter, the Emoluments Clause aims to prevent this type of foreign government influence by prohibiting office holders like the President from receiving money or financial benefits from foreign states.
By claiming Trump will be violating the Constitution, Painter is arguing that the Emoluments Clause requires full divestment from businesses that could potentially provide profits influenced by foreign governments.
Richard Painter: Trump Emoluments Clause
on Saturday, January 14, 2017Richard Painter Money Quote saying Trump legal maneuvers attempting to skirt the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution are entirely inappropriate. Richard Painter said:
“The plan we heard today does not comply with the law. And these emoluments, these payments from foreign governments, have to be out of the Trump business empire on Jan. 20 or he will be in violation of the law” — Richard Painter
Share the Richard Painter Money quote image above on your site:
Short Link to this Quote:
Richard Painter is saying that President Trump’s plan to address conflicts of interest regarding his business empire does not go far enough to comply with the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Painter argues that for Trump to avoid being in violation of the law when he takes office on January 20th, he needs to fully divest from his business interests and remove “emoluments” or payments from foreign governments.
By saying Trump “will be in violation of the law” if he does not divest, Painter is asserting that the Emoluments Clause requires the President not to receive any foreign government payments or profits through his business activities when serving as President.
Richard Painter: Fiduciary Duty Self Greed
on Monday, October 3, 2016Richard W. Painter Money Quote saying saying that the Trump claim of fiduciary duty to himself is better defined as greed. Richard W. Painter said:
“There is no such thing as a fiduciary duty as a businessman to oneself. That’s called greed. And greed is not a component of the law of fiduciary duty anywhere” — Richard W. Painter
Share the Richard W. Painter Money quote image above on your site:
Short Link to this Quote:
Richard Painter is arguing that a businessman does not actually have a “fiduciary duty” to act in their own self-interest above all else, as President Trump has claimed. Painter states that putting one’s own personal financial interests above all other considerations is simply called “greed,” not fiduciary duty.
As a lawyer, Painter is pointing out that fiduciary duty in law requires acting in the best interests of others, such as shareholders or clients, not just oneself.
By claiming greed is not a legal component of fiduciary duty, Painter appears to be asserting that the President must put the nation’s interests above his own business and financial concerns, as required by the Constitution, rather than prioritizing self-enrichment.
Richard Painter: Trump Owes Banks
on Monday, June 6, 2016Richard Painter Money Quote saying because Trump owes Deutsche Bank over $100 million, regulators put his business at risk. Richard Painter said:
“Having a president who owes a lot of money to banks, particularly when it’s on negotiable terms – it puts them at the mercy of the banks and the banks are at the mercy of regulators. That is a potentially very troublesome business model for someone in public office” — Richard Painter
Share the Richard Painter Money quote image above on your site:
Short Link to this Quote:
Richard Painter is raising concerns about President Trump owing large amounts of money to banks. Painter argues that this debt puts the President in a position where he could be influenced by the banks that have loaned him money.
As the head of the executive branch, the President oversees banking regulators who have power over those banks. Therefore, according to Painter, the President’s significant debt to banks creates a conflict of interest, as the banks’ interests could potentially affect his decisions as regulator-in-chief.
By saying this is a “troublesome business model” for a public officeholder, Painter appears to believe the Emoluments Clause was intended to prevent this type of scenario where a President’s private financial dealings could undermine his independent decision making for the nation.