Updated at bottom
OK, after blogging yesterday about Treasury Secretary-designee Tim Geithner and his allegedly tax and nanny problems, I realized I have yet more questions than those I raised yesterday.
Per the Senate Finance Committee (PDF), although audited by the IRS in 2006 over the back taxes for his time working for the International Monetary Fund, Geithner didn’t pony up the amount of back taxes he owed until Dec. 5 of last year, after Obama nominated him.
And, this leads to other questions.
• Did Obama’s campaign think it could just “get away with this”?
• If Obama and his staff thought Geithner was worth it, did they not have a better plan for how to handle this?
• Did Obama’s team ask Geithner why he hadn’t yet paid the back taxes he owed?
And, as I asked before:
• Who first spotted this?
• Did somebody find out Geithner hadn’t paid the back taxes, or did he volunteer the info?
• Does this have any reflection on the vetting of Bill Richardson, especially in light of my new questions?
And a couple more new questions:
• Did Obama’s campaign think it could just “get away with this”?
• If Obama and his staff thought Geithner was worth it, did they not have a better plan for how to handle this?
• Did Obama’s team ask Geithner why he hadn’t yet paid the back taxes he owed?
And, as I asked before:
• Who first spotted this?
• Did somebody find out Geithner hadn’t paid the back taxes, or did he volunteer the info?
• Does this have any reflection on the vetting of Bill Richardson, especially in light of my new questions?
Update: I am perhaps being a bit hard on Geithner. Geithner paid the two years of back taxes the IRS discovered at the time it came across them. The Obama vetting team discovered he had owed for two more years, that the IRS could not pursued due to statute of limitations, and he voluntarily paid this, he told Congress.
BUT - according to the NYT, he paid another $7K for unrelated tax penalties.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
January 14, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment