Why is Romney not disclosing his returns?

Quote from PiggyBank:

You are making assumptions to support your PURE FANTASY that Romney placed somehow artificially deflated assets into his IRA. here is some stuff for you to consider.

1) No one has posted and we haven't seen the actual 'ins' and 'outs' at Bain during this time, we don't KNOW the actual annual rate of return.

2) you are judging only these 16 years.. that was over 12 fucking years ago.

3) assuming he started his IRA year 1 at Bain (it could have been earlier), and contributed ONLY 2k/ beginning of the year for the last 28 years he needed to avg 41%/year compounded to break $100m.. less than half the 88%.

4) The above obviously doesn't include any rollover he might have had, when we know he had access to a self-directed 401k at Bain. It also doesn't include the larger contributions that were allowed to the IRA later. These alone could have made a significant difference in the avg compounded rate required afterwards to achieve 100m. http://thela25.com/blog/how-create-100m-self-directed-ira

5) You have no idea what he is invested in now or then, if he had a huge couple of years early on, or what he rolled over from Bain. there are many realistic possibilities even under the 41%.

6) We don't know the exact value of his IRA, it could be less than 100m.

conclusion: he could have broke 100m in any number of ways, and NONE of them had to be placing artificially deflated assets into his IRA (however that's possible anyway).

side note: you are possibly the most annoyingly condescending poster on the board. I find your supreme arrogance on all subjects, especially investing, fucking ridiculous when this is how you claim to trade: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...5&perpage=6&highlight=piggybank&pagenumber=11

quit posting like a douche bro.. or be right.
More...

There is NO evidence for greater than market returns, sans leverage, from independent sources who have looked, over at Bain. Therefore, it is mathematically impossible, no matter about rollovers (which are supremely and utterly irrelevant to the math) to get to 103 mil by the guy who actually ran the place during the time analyzed, who has publicly shown therefore, that without leverage he can't generate greater than market returns, unless something else was done to juice the returns. That was the point of the post, which apparently you missed.
As for the condescending part, eh whatevs. I have had death wished upon me three times, so far, by you right wing fanatics. If condescension is what I'm giving back, I think that shows restraint.
 
What you just said is the complete opposite of reality, there is ALL KINDS OF SOURCES that will confirm Bain had huge market returns. It never ceases to amaze me that someone can be so blinded by hatred that they are willing to completely dismiss the facts, and then make a fool of themselves.

Quote from trefoil:

There is NO evidence for greater than market returns, sans leverage, from independent sources who have looked, over at Bain.
More...
 
So I paid taxes every single year," Romney said. "Harry Reid's charge is totally false. I'm sure waiting for Harry to put up who it was that told him what he says they told him. I don't believe it for a minute, by the way."
More...

This is what I've been waiting for Romney to say. Supposedly, Reid has seen the tax returns provided by a Bain insider. If not, why did Reid make the statement that Romney had not paid taxes? Reid got that information from somewhere, and it had to be someone he trusted.

If there was something that could be contrued as illegal in Romney's returns, the IRS would have contacted him by now in the course of their investigation and we would know about it. So I don't think there's any legal problems with the returns.

Romney says he reviewed his last ten years of taxes and discloses the percentage he's paid. There's no reason for him to not release them and get this over with. He's got a good chance of winning this election, and if you review elections historically, candidates lose because of missteps taken during their campaigns. Romney's biggest weakness right now is being portrayed as a corporate villain. He can reduce that weakness by releasing his returns.
 
This is starting to look like a ruse by a Romney campaign operative. Harry Reid would not be stupid enough to make such a brash statment unless he thought he had seen Romney's returns. Could they have been false returns designed to get Reid to do exactly what he did?

Either that I have overestimated Reid's intelligence.
 
Romney is playing the politicians game. This could be one of three things. Romney is thinking the information in the tax returns will cost him votes. Or he is playing the Obama team and will release the returns at a time he thinks will help him the most. Or third he just don't know what to do.
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

Romney....Basically says Reid is a liar.
More...
Isn't he?
Quote from hughb:

...Harry Reid would not be stupid enough to make such a brash statement...
More...
What makes you say that?
 
Quote from trefoil:

There is NO evidence for greater than market returns, sans leverage, from independent sources who have looked, over at Bain. Therefore, it is mathematically impossible, no matter about rollovers (which are supremely and utterly irrelevant to the math) to get to 103 mil by the guy who actually ran the place during the time analyzed, who has publicly shown therefore, that without leverage he can't generate greater than market returns, unless something else was done to juice the returns. That was the point of the post, which apparently you missed.
As for the condescending part, eh whatevs. I have had death wished upon me three times, so far, by you right wing fanatics. If condescension is what I'm giving back, I think that shows restraint.
More...

Unreal dude, you didn't read the post and you are completely wrong. Max posted this link http://www.selfdirectedirasforlife.com/mit-romneys-ira-investments-garner-public-interest/ stating that Romney was allowed pretax money into Bain deals. Again you don't know exactly what he, ROMNEY, was invested in. The fund returns do not necessarily equal Romney's returns. He could have picked only deals he saw as worthy, it doesn't mean he was invested in the funds available to investors. Again I posted this link: http://thela25.com/blog/how-create-100m-self-directed-ira, which states that Bain had a self directed 401k plan with an annual contribution of 30k.

"Rollover. It appears this was a major part of his strategy. Geoffrey Rehnert, a former Bain Capital partner who helped found the firm in 1984, said in that era it had a 401(k) plan that allowed employees to invest pretax dollars in its deals. Bain's 401(k) plan was self-directed and wasn't restricted to the usual set of mutual funds that most Americans are limited to. In 1984, the self-directed 401(k) structure allowed Mr. Romney and Bain to contribute up to $30k per year into his account. I'm guessing Mr. Romney took full advantage and maxed his contributions. Then once he built his fortune in the 401(k) plan, he did a 401(k) rollover into a self-directed IRA. But $100M is still a LOT of money when you can only put away $30k per year." He could have been invested in ANYTHING not necessarily just Bain funds or deals.

It is speculation that Romney had and funded this 401k, but if he did for 16 years it DRAMATICALLY changes the avg compounded RoR he needed to achieve 100m, which we still don't know for sure that he has in his IRA. If he began contributing in '84 the full 30k starting at the beginning of each year for the first 16 years and then rolled over to a an IRA and contributed ONLY 2k/year he only needed an avg 27%/year compounded. This is assuming he didn't even have an IRA at the same time as the 401k. The possibilities are endless. Your line about rollovers being irrelevant is unbelievably FALSE.. check your math. Also, like Phoenix said, leveraged instruments ARE still available in certain plans, like self directed 401k's and IRA's.

Reality is, it isn't only possible that Romney achieved 100m LEGITIMATELY in his IRA, it is many many times more likely than your assertion that he cheated. A baseless accusation on your part which you stated with certainty and are now defending irrationally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top