WARREN BUFFETT SUED BY OBAMA’S IRS… EVEN HE ISN’T SAFE - WAIT UNTIL THEY COME AFTER YOU FOR OBAMA’S SECOND-TERM TAXES AND OBAMACARE

WARREN BUFFETT SUED BY OBAMA’S IRS

By AJ

Obama and his rich pals think you are just another useful idiot like the Occupy (OWS) crowd.

While Obama seeks to enact the “Buffett Rule” to place a higher tax burden on families/small businesses who make $250K per year or more, his Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is suing Warren Buffett.

Obama’s pal just doesn’t want to pay his taxes… but he has no problem stumping for Obama and calling for a higher tax burden on families and small businesses.

“Get this: Uncle Sam is suing Warren Buffett's company over taxes. Yes, taxes. The US government, in a little-followed case in Ohio, filed a lawsuit this month against a unit of Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, seeking $366 million in taxes and penalties. The Berkshire division at the centre of the suit is NetJets, the private-aircraft company that caters to the nation's wealthiest - the people Buffett says should pay more in taxes.

It is an odd twist that a company controlled by Buffett - perhaps the most outspoken businessman in the country in support of raising taxes on the 'mega-rich' - is now in a dispute with the government over his company's paying too little in taxes.”

But it gets better… Buffett’s NetJets has now filed a lawsuit against the IRS.

“Now, NetJets and its sister division, which have filed their own suit against the IRS, say they "are stuck with a $642 million-plus bill for past taxes the IRS never indicated they were required to collect".

Obama’s rich friends do not want to pay their taxes, but they want to instill envy in the hearts of the uneducated and sing their “tax the rich” song.

Obama’s pal and Jobs Adviser, Jeffrey Immelt, has benefited since Obama took office through the same tax loopholes that Obama criticizes on the campaign trail. General Electric paid no Taxes in 2009, General Electric Paid No Federal Taxes in 2010.

“…GE's success at avoiding taxes is nothing short of extraordinary. The company, led by Immelt, earned $14.2 billion in profits in 2010, but it paid not a penny in taxes because the bulk of those profits, some $9 billion, were offshore. In fact, GE got a $3.2 billion tax benefit.”

Before blindly jumping on the “Tax the Rich” bandwagon, people should ask two simple questions:

1. If Obama makes people pay even more in taxes, will I get some of that money? (Answer = No).
2. Why are Obama’s millionaire and billionaire friends unwilling to pay more in taxes themselves?

Video:  Patriotic Millionaires Higher Taxes Treasury Department Donation The Daily Caller

Maybe it’s time to rethink the envy that Obama is selling, or at least see it for the BIG LIE that it is.

Video:  Milton Friedman: Why soaking the rich won't work. Reference:

Private jets, Warren Buffett and tax lawsuit

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-03-28/news/31249610_1_ticket-tax-tax-battle-first-tax

General Electric paid no Taxes in 2009

http://www.politisite.com/2010/04/12/general-electric-paid-no-taxes-in-2009/

General Electric Paid No Federal Taxes in 2010

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558

Obama's Second-Term Taxes 

By DICK MORRIS  - Published on TheHill.com on April 10, 2012

If Obama is reelected, the tax increase he and a Democratic Congress would impose on middle- and upper-middle-income Americans would be disastrous. It's easy to lose sight of his tax plans because he has hidden them in a variety of nooks and crannies, including the Simpson-Bowles Commission Report, the Pelosi budget of 2009 and the various tax proposals advanced by his party. But, should he win, they will all come out of hiding, and together, they will be the principal legislative thrust of his efforts in 2013.

For a couple making $250,000, these tax hikes would add another $3,000 to $4,000 a month in taxes (depending on whether they were self-employed).

For a couple making $150,000, they would add another $1,200 to $1,400 per month.
Let's all realize that Obama let a massive deficit accumulate precisely because he realized that doing so gave him the leverage he would need to raise taxes and increase, permanently, the size of government in America. Reagan let the deficit pile up so liberals couldn't spend more money. Obama did so in order to make conservatives vote for higher taxes.

How will he tax us? Let us count the ways:

• Most basic, of course, will be an increase in tax rates. Those paying 33 percent will now pay 36 percent. People paying 35 percent will now pay 40 percent. Most people accept and expect that Obama will raise these brackets if he is reelected. But they don't realize what else he will do.

• As he advocated in the 2008 campaign, he will eliminate the ceiling on wages that must be taxed for Social Security. Currently, wages are taxed at 6.2 percent (now, temporarily, at 4.2 percent) up to a ceiling about $100,000 per year in income. The ceiling rises with the cost of living. But Obama will eliminate the ceiling and subject all wages to FICA taxation. (In his campaign, he spoke of a "carve-out" for those making between $100,000 and $200,000, where income would be exempt from FICA, but don't count on it.) For those who are employed, the increase in FICA taxes will mean an effective increase in their tax bracket of 6.2 percentage points. For the self-employed, it will mean a whopping 12.4 percentage point increase, bringing their effective tax rate, if they are in the top bracket, over 52 percent. Obama has refrained from addressing Social Security's financial problems and will do so until after the election. But his solution will be higher taxes, not curtailed benefits.

• All deductions for mortgage interest, charitable giving and state and local tax payments would likely end for those making more than $250,000.

• Even for those making less than $250,000, the Bowles-Simpson recommendations call for replacing the current tax deduction for mortgage interest, charitable giving and state and local taxes with a tax credit. Usually 8 percent is mentioned as the tax credit level.

So add it up:

Case A
Married couple
Income: $250,000
Home: $300,000 (mortgage interest: $20,000)
Property taxes: $15,000
Self-employed
Basic tax rate: +5% +$12,500
FICA on full income: +$18,600 ($9,300 if employed)
No deduction
Mortgage interest +$ 6,500
Prop Taxes +$5,000
State income tax (9%) +$7,500
Total additional tax: +$50,100 ($40,800 if employed)

Case B
Married couple
Income: $150,000
Home: $200,000 (mortgage interest: $10,000)
Property taxes: $10,000
Self-employed
Basic tax rate: +3% +$ 4,500
FICA on full income +$6,200 ($3,100 if employed)
8% credit, no deduction
Mortgage interest +$ 2,500
Property taxes +$ 2,500
State income tax (6%) +$ 1,500
(calculation replaces deduction at 33% bracket with an 8% credit)
Total additional tax: +$17,200 ($14,100 if employed)

Can we afford Barack Obama for four more years? No way! And don't say you weren't warned!

Related:

A Wicked Financial Storm Descends on America

Nothing to Do With Health Care!  It’s All About New Taxes and Tax Collection

Wells Fargo’s Commercial Portfolio set to Explode?

Wells Fargo – $138.6B

Since early 2007

161

banks have "imploded*"

September 17th, 2009

This morning, Teri Buhl released an exclusive report entitled “Wells Fargo’s Commercial Portfolio is a ticking time bomb.” The report details how Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) has hired outside consultants to review its commercial portfolio and reportedly “they are shocked with what they are seeing. Not only do the bank’s outstanding commercial loans collectively exceed the property values to which they are attached, but derivative trades leftover from its acquisition of Wachovia are creating another set of problems for the already beleaguered San Francisco-based megabank.”

To view the complete article on Bankimplode.com, please check out: Exclusive – Wells Fargo’s Commercial Portfolio is a ticking time bomb

As of 6/30/09, notable holders of Wells Fargo include:
#1) Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway: (302,609,212 shares)
#7) Wellington Management Company (132,768,076 shares)
#9) Dodge & Cox (82,146,205 shares)
#50) CalPERS: (10,693,798 shares)

For Detailed Investor Profiles on these Investors, click below:

Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffett)

CalPERS

Related People: Charles T. Munger;

Warren E. Buffett

Related Entities: Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance Group;

General Re; MidAmerican Energy Holdings; California Public Employees' Retirement System; GEICO

Contributed by: Teri Buhl

---------------

Wells Fargo on the Writedown-Rundown & General Distress Lists

September 14, 2009 – 6:01 am

2009-09-18-The Fat Lady Clears her Throat:

They say it ain’t over until the fat lady sings, well she’s clearing her throat.

In order to sort through the disaster that is Wells Fargo’s (quote: WFC) commercial loan portfolio, the bank has hired help from outside experts to pour over the books… and they are shocked with what they are seeing. Not only do the bank’s outstanding commercial loans collectively exceed the property values to which they are attached, but derivative trades leftover from its acquisition of Wachovia are creating another set of problems for the already beleaguered San Francisco-based megabank.

2009-09-17-Snake Eating Its Own Tail:

So you wonder how Wells Fargo manages to positive quarters in a row during the greatest credit crisis of all time. It’s easy. They have a ready-made buyer for any crap they want to sell at any price. Don’t believe it?

This borrower couldn’t pay and thus stopped doing so. This should generate a “NOD” (Notice of Default) and ultimately lead to foreclosure, right? It should result in an impaired asset which might be sold to some other company (at a discount), right?

It got sold all right – right at the “120 day” late point where Wells counts a loan as “defaulted.”

But look at who it got sold to…..

Wells Fargo has literally become a snake eating its own tail.

2009-09-14-The Party is Over:

The party is over at least for one ex-Well Fargo senior vice president, at least for now. (Full Article)

For Detailed Investor Profiles on these Investors, click below:

Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffett)

CalPERS

Related People: Charles T. Munger; Warren E. Buffett

Related Entities: Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance Group; General Re; MidAmerican Energy Holdings; California Public Employees' Retirement System; GEICO

• Liberal Billionaire (& Obama Money Man) George Soros… Major Shareholder in IndyMac/One West Bank
• IS GEORGE SOROS THE PUPPET MASTER?
  • Yosi Sergant - Obama Is a Figurehead...
  • David Horowitz: Obama the 'Manchurian Candidate'
  • Video - Is a Group of Groups Driving the Bus of Obama?
  • Video Shows ACORN Founder Wade Rathke Plotting America’s Downfall
  • Soros at Top of the Revolution Tree

Warren Buffett Joins Critics on Obamanomics: Too Much Spending – Too Much Debt – Not Sustainable: Stop Spending, Stop Printing Money and No New Big Pr

Double Dip Recession Around the Corner

Times Topics: Warren E. Buffett

IN nature, every action has consequences, a phenomenon called the butterfly effect. These consequences, moreover, are not necessarily proportional. For example, doubling the carbon dioxide we belch into the atmosphere may far more than double the subsequent problems for society. Realizing this, the world properly worries about greenhouse emissions.

The butterfly effect reaches into the financial world as well. Here, the United States is spewing a potentially damaging substance into our economy — greenback emissions.

To be sure, we’ve been doing this for a reason I resoundingly applaud. Last fall, our financial system stood on the brink of a collapse that threatened a depression. The crisis required our government to display wisdom, courage and decisiveness. Fortunately, the Federal Reserve and key economic officials in both the Bush and Obama administrations responded more than ably to the need.

They made mistakes, of course. How could it have been otherwise when supposedly indestructible pillars of our economic structure were tumbling all around them? A meltdown, though, was avoided, with a gusher of federal money playing an essential role in the rescue.

The United States economy is now out of the emergency room and appears to be on a slow path to recovery. But enormous dosages of monetary medicine continue to be administered and, before long, we will need to deal with their side effects. For now, most of those effects are invisible and could indeed remain latent for a long time. Still, their threat may be as ominous as that posed by the financial crisis itself.

To understand this threat, we need to look at where we stand historically. If we leave aside the war-impacted years of 1942 to 1946, the largest annual deficit the United States has incurred since 1920 was 6 percent of gross domestic product. This fiscal year, though, the deficit will rise to about 13 percent of G.D.P., more than twice the non-wartime record. In dollars, that equates to a staggering $1.8 trillion. Fiscally, we are in uncharted territory.

Because of this gigantic deficit, our country’s “net debt” (that is, the amount held publicly) is mushrooming. During this fiscal year, it will increase more than one percentage point per month, climbing to about 56 percent of G.D.P. from 41 percent. Admittedly, other countries, like Japan and Italy, have far higher ratios and no one can know the precise level of net debt to G.D.P. at which the United States will lose its reputation for financial integrity. But a few more years like this one and we will find out.

An increase in federal debt can be financed in three ways: borrowing from foreigners, borrowing from our own citizens or, through a roundabout process, printing money. Let’s look at the prospects for each individually — and in combination.

The current account deficit — dollars that we force-feed to the rest of the world and that must then be invested — will be $400 billion or so this year. Assume, in a relatively benign scenario, that all of this is directed by the recipients — China leads the list — to purchases of United States debt. Never mind that this all-Treasuries allocation is no sure thing: some countries may decide that purchasing American stocks, real estate or entire companies makes more sense than soaking up dollar-denominated bonds. Rumblings to that effect have recently increased.

Then take the second element of the scenario — borrowing from our own citizens. Assume that Americans save $500 billion, far above what they’ve saved recently but perhaps consistent with the changing national mood. Finally, assume that these citizens opt to put all their savings into United States Treasuries (partly through intermediaries like banks).

Even with these heroic assumptions, the Treasury will be obliged to find another $900 billion to finance the remainder of the $1.8 trillion of debt it is issuing. Washington’s printing presses will need to work overtime.

Legislators will correctly perceive that either raising taxes or cutting expenditures will threaten their re-election. To avoid this fate, they can opt for high rates of inflation, which never require a recorded vote and cannot be attributed to a specific action that any elected official takes. In fact, John Maynard Keynes long ago laid out a road map for political survival amid an economic disaster of just this sort: “By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.... The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”

I want to emphasize that there is nothing evil or destructive in an increase in debt that is proportional to an increase in income or assets. As the resources of individuals, corporations and countries grow, each can handle more debt. The United States remains by far the most prosperous country on earth, and its debt-carrying capacity will grow in the future just as it has in the past.

But it was a wise man who said, “All I want to know is where I’m going to die so I’ll never go there.” We don’t want our country to evolve into the banana-republic economy described by Keynes.

Our immediate problem is to get our country back on its feet and flourishing — “whatever it takes” still makes sense. Once recovery is gained, however, Congress must end the rise in the debt-to-G.D.P. ratio and keep our growth in obligations in line with our growth in resources.

Unchecked carbon emissions will likely cause icebergs to melt. Unchecked greenback emissions will certainly cause the purchasing power of currency to melt. The dollar’s destiny lies with Congress.

Warren E. Buffett is the chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway, a diversified holding company.

Warren Buffett Sees Much Higher Unemployment Ahead

Billionaire Warren Buffett says the economy has "fallen off a cliff" over the past six months and consumers have changed their habits in remarkable ways.

Buffett said Monday during a live appearance on CNBC that current economic turmoil has basically followed the worst-case scenario he envisioned.

"It's fallen off a cliff," Buffett said. "Not only has the economy slowed down a lot, but people have really changed their habits like I haven't seen."

Buffett said he's seen the changes showing up in the results of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.'s subsidiaries. He said Berkshire's jewelry companies have suffered, but more people have been willing to switch to Geico to save money on car insurance.

Buffett predicted that unemployment will likely climb a lot higher before the recession is done, but he also reiterated his optimistic long-term view.

"Everything will be alright. We do have the greatest economic machine that's ever been created," Buffett said.

Buffett said the nation needs a clear message from the government about what the problem is in the economy and what will be done. He said all 535 members of Congress should set aside partisan bickering to deal with what Buffett has called an economic Pearl Harbor.

"What is required is a commander in chief that's looked at like a commander in chief in a time of war," Buffett said.

Fear and confusion has been driving much of consumer and investor behavior in recent months, Buffett said. The nation's leaders need to clear up the confusion about the economy before anyone will become more confident, he said.

A little over a week ago, Buffett released his annual letter to shareholders describing the worst of his 44 years at the helm of Berkshire. The Omaha, Neb.-based company reported sharply lower profit because of its largely unrealized $7.5 billion investment and derivative losses.

Overall, Berkshire's 2008 profit of $4.99 billion, or $3,224 per Class A share, was down 62 percent from $13.21 billion, or $8,548 per share, in 2007.

Berkshire's fourth-quarter numbers were even worse. Buffett's company reported net income of $117 million, or $76 per share, down 96 percent from $2.95 billion, or $1,904 per share, a year earlier.

Berkshire owns a diverse mix of more than 60 companies, including insurance, furniture, carpet, jewelry, restaurants and utility businesses. And it has major investments in such companies as Wells Fargo & Co. and Coca-Cola Co.

Source:  MoneyNews.com