| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Theresa Heinz-Kerry Does Not Want to release Tax Returns |
| 2004-04-15 |
| Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, who has called for full-disclosure of rivals’ tax returns, now faces growing pressure to release his wife’s records. But in a Tax Day controversy, Teresa Heinz Kerry is personally determined to keep her returns out of public view -- at any cost! ALL THAT KETCHUP AND SOUP STOCK "This is my life, my business, not John’s," Mrs. Kerry recently explained to a campaign staffer, a top source tells the DRUDGE REPORT. "I think it is very important to keep the privacy zone. There is a tradition of this." YEAH - BUT IF YOU ARE IN THE KITCHEN WITH SOUP, THEN YOU MUST SERVE THE ENTREE! RELEASE THE RETURNS! Laura Ingraham had a recording of TH-K calling herself "Nurse Fuzzy-Wuzzy" after the esteemed Senator’s recent rotator cuff shoulder surgery. I think that the finances are Fuzzy-Wuzzy as well. |
| Posted by:Anonymous4052 |
| #20 Apparently he didn't credit himself with paying any personal property tax. But he must have paid something since he has paid mortgage interest and the property taxes in Massachusetts are way higher than zero. I think he needs to file an amended return and he'll get a refund (of course as others have pointed out he'll have to pay a fine for underwitholding), |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-04-15 8:21:17 PM |
| #19 Heinz won't disclose because it will reveal her and her husband for what they are: incredibly rich elitists. That would make John's "workingman's hero" schtick an even harder sell than it already is. |
| Posted by: RMcLeod 2004-04-16 12:48:59 AM |
| #18 Not a big deal. In November, we will have roast Kerry, hold the ketchup. |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-04-15 9:21:40 PM |
| #17 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: mhw TROLL 2004-04-15 8:21:17 PM |
| #16 Malpractice Suit? |
| Posted by: Anonymous4153 2004-04-15 7:36:59 PM |
| #15 LOL! R.C. Perhaps Viagra? You know the ole 'war wound'..... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-04-15 7:32:50 PM |
| #14 Tibor, Dr. Frankenstein doesn't work cheap. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-04-15 7:30:26 PM |
| #13 As a US Senator, I would imagine the Kerry pays at most a small portion of his health care premium. Yet he had medical expenses of over $9000. Now these are medical expenses that are out of pocket, not those covered by insurance. So what did he spend $9k on? Botox treatments? Inquiring minds want to know. |
| Posted by: Tibor 2004-04-15 7:22:10 PM |
| #12 Anonymous4052 - AntiGum obviously means thankfully in the sense that the former Seantor Heinz was a bastard Freeper Republican. I doubt we'd hear similar sentiments about Paul Wellstone. Do I have that right, AntiGum? |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-04-15 6:10:11 PM |
| #11 growle - I must've missed that entirely. I've been reading the Freeper bastard York's articles on the subversive Freeper bastard NRO site since his 2003 return was released. Oh, AntiGum? This is a recurring theme in politics, so I fail to see why your charge of 'hypocrisy' has merit. |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-04-15 6:07:01 PM |
| #10 thankfully dead husband I don't think she would agree with you, AntiGum, on that remark. |
| Posted by: Anonymous4052 2004-04-15 6:03:49 PM |
| #9 Damnit! Freeper bastards projecting on JFK. Typical, hypocritical, it's her business! She inheirited it from her thankfully dead husband. She won! To steal a phrase. Get over it! I expect many bad botox jokes and perhaps a call for the jacket of love. |
| Posted by: AntiGum 2004-04-15 5:50:05 PM |
| #8 Raj: I assume you saw his return at National Review Online. There's something weird about his 2210. Looks like the YES box was checked when the NO box should've been (since $32,941.00 is not "more than line 8." Anyways, you won't find his 2002 form online. From the NY Times, Nov. 27, 2003: Mr. Kerry's financial disclosure form from May lists accounts and trusts in his own name worth $400,000 to $1.8 million, and other assets held jointly with his wife at $300,000 to $600,000. One joint asset is a "painting held as an investment," worth $250,000 to $500,000. Ms. Heinz Kerry would not identify the work, but said that it had been recently sold "to a very good collection." Mr. Kerry's aides have said he has assets worth at least several million dollars that do not have to be listed on his disclosure forms, like personal property not being held for investment purposes. One such asset is Mr. Kerry's share of the couple's Beacon Hill house, which they bought around the time they were married in 1995, and rebuilt. Borrowing against his share -- he is believed to own half the house From AP, May 16, 2003: Sen. John Kerry, whose wife is enormously wealthy, inherited three trusts from his mother last year, according to a financial disclosure report released Friday. After the death of his mother, Rosemary Forbes Kerry, last November, the Massachusetts Democrat inherited three trusts with between $300,000 and $1.5 million in assets. The holdings include between $66,000 and $165,000 in U.S. Treasury bonds as well as thousands of dollars in stocks, ranging from General Electric Co. and Merck & Co. to 3M Co. and Proctor & Gamble. From the AP, Dec. 18, 2003: According to tax returns released by his campaign Thursday, Kerry, who files separately from his wife, reported taxable income of $111,540 for 2002, primarily based on his Senate pay. He paid $29,946 in federal taxes, $7,286 in state income taxes and $1,167 in personal property taxes. He also reported giving $18,600 to charities last year. Kerry also had $23,317 in short- and long-term losses on trusts he owns. Kerry has four trusts, including three he inherited last year from his mother, Rosemary Forbes Kerry. Again, can't find any form; just those figures. |
| Posted by: growler 2004-04-15 5:42:15 PM |
| #7 She's not running for office, he is. What started this full disclosure of tax returns anyway? Why is it our biz what Bush or Kerry or any other public figure made? If they did something illegal, you know the IRS scours all of their returns. Honestly, I don't get it. |
| Posted by: The Other Mike S. 2004-04-15 5:13:25 PM |
| #6 we are dems we have no double standards! it is our way or no way! is this what we should expect from a hienz first lady! stay the fuck out of my business you little people! |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-04-15 5:08:23 PM |
| #5 Naahhhhh - No double standards or gimmees for these assholes. Do the same as they would require of Republicans - in fact, they should be offering to do that so as to maintain that standard of transparency. Open up Thereeeeza! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-04-15 4:56:09 PM |
| #4 Maybe Teresa could just release a redacted return which answers the questions relating to whether she is funding her husband's campaign. She wouldn't have to release information about which equities she owns or her medical expenses, etc. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-04-15 4:43:32 PM |
| #3 as was noted in various places in the blogoshpere yesterday, his capital gains on his half (sound familiar?)of the million dollar painting sale last year bring up other questions, such as where he got the cash to speculate in teh first place. Release the |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-04-15 4:36:03 PM |
| #2 growler - that's a big affirmative. The only taxes listed on Sch. A look like his state withholding from his salary as U.S. Senator. I reviewed JFK's return, and I'm pretty sure his tax prep guys 'inadvertently onitted' the 2210 underpayment penalty. However, I need his 2002 Fed. return to confirm whether he meets the prior year exception. Any Rantburger links to that return will be greatly appreciated. |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-04-15 4:30:54 PM |
| #1 Considering John's reported income isn't even enough to pay the property taxes on all their homes, I think it is our business. After all, he's living off her money. |
| Posted by: growler 2004-04-15 4:26:29 PM |