* Let’s take a look at six different views on the Bill Brady “didn’t pay any income tax” issue. First up, the candidate himself via press release…
“My family has been blessed, and while the down years have been hard to swallow personally, what has really pained us is the difficulty these times brought to our extended family — the men and women who we were lucky enough to have with our firm,” Brady said. “With private sector businesses like ours, there are good years and bad years. We’re optimistic and know it will work out in the end, but for many workers, it all means a lot of struggle. We’ve had to make the tough decisions and are coming through all right. We need to do the same thing for state government.” […]
In making the returns available, Brady said he supports the public’s right to have confidence that elected officials have no potential conflicts of interest.
“I don’t want anything to distract from my commitment to bring a clean break to Illinois, which we need so badly,” he said. “The people who were part of our company suffered the effects of a state with a job-killing environment. As governor, I’ll work to end the corruption and old politics that hurts so many people.”
* Greg Hinz from Crain’s…
But, as a matter of practical politics, Mr. Brady still is going to have to explain how he really can make $75,000 a year as a state senator and still pay nothing, or almost nothing, in federal income taxes in three of the past four years.
[Brady’s tax attorney] said the typical Illinoisan “can relate” to Brady’s financial woes. We’ll see.
* Mark Brown in a Sun-Times column entitled: Why gripe about taxes when you don’t pay any?…
This is the weaselly way of “releasing” tax returns that seems to be in the Illinois GOP playbook for 2010. U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, the Republican nominee for Senate against Giannoulias, used pretty much the same method to “release” his tax returns, one big difference being that Kirk’s returns are a lot less complicated than those of Brady, who has many business interests.
While I can appreciate that the two men probably don’t want copies of their returns floating around on the Internet for the rest of their lives, this also has the effect of not giving anyone in the public a real opportunity to scrutinize what’s in those returns. […]
While this may be just how it works when you own your own business, I don’t think I’ll be alone in believing there’s something unfair about a rich guy who also draws a nice government salary but doesn’t pay any income taxes. And something phony about a guy in those circumstances who complains about taxes being too high.
In a press release, Brady voiced his regrets at how the real estate downturn had forced his company to lay off many of its employees, which he also cited as evidence of why he’d make a good governor. It would be interesting to know how many of those employees got by with paying no taxes. It would be interesting to know what trims the Brady family budget took in those years.
* Now, let’s turn to somebody I don’t quote very often here. Doug Ibendahl…
It’s going to be hard for a guy like Brady who has obviously been wealthy enough to afford the luxury of running for governor for basically the last six years straight, to explain why he couldn’t at least kick something into the kitty from the generous state salary he receives. For a fraction of the price the Brady family likely spent on tax lawyers and accountants, Bill could have at least demonstrated he had some skin in the game on the state’s budget crisis.
Tax accountants can be expensive, but probably not that expensive. Still, I see the point. Not to mention the $30K Brady loaned his campaign in 2008 and the $101K he loaned his campaign in 2009, but let’s get back to Ibendahl’s argument…
Again, I know it’s surely all legal. But paying zip in 2008 while you’re on the state payroll and running for governor simply looks bad. It looks even worse when you’ve tried to play the hero to the tea partiers – but now the tea partiers find out you eagerly embraced the hated Obama stimulus plan to greatly reduce your tax burden. […]
Bill Brady should have told Republicans the facts during the primary race. He should have disclosed his returns in December or January (at a minimum, 2008 and prior would have been available). By waiting until now, Brady has given the Democrats effective ammo.
Would it have made a difference in the February primary? I think it would have – certainly 200 votes worth at least – and I think it’s pretty clear that’s why Brady didn’t want to release his returns. I think the excuse about not wanting to reveal proprietary business secrets to his competitors was bogus.
Ibendahl is right that such a disclosure might’ve thrown the close-as-could-be primary to somebody else. Whether Quinn and the Democrats can make this an effective argument is yet to be seen. So far, the coverage has been pretty even-handed.
* As a reminder, here is a statement the Quinn campaign released on Friday…
Today, after significant pressure, Senator Brady agreed to share several years of his past tax returns with the press. But there were conditions: instead of making copies available to the taxpayers of the state, select members of the media were invited to “view” his returns only for a limited period of time. This sounds more like a glimpse of Haley’s Comet or of a solar eclipse than the full disclosure the public deserves.
The original Tea Party’s rallying cry was “no taxation without representation.” Apparently, Senator Brady misinterpreted this line as “no taxation for elected representatives.” Since the public was not afforded the opportunity to view his returns, it’s likely we won’t know how he managed to pay no income taxes on over $100,000 of income in more than one tax year.
Given his track record—of supporting tax cuts for the wealthy but voting against a minimum wage, and of avoiding taxes on the salaries of his campaign officials—it’s not surprising that Bill Brady believes a different standard should apply to him.
If Senator Brady is this secretive and controlling about basic information like his tax returns, just imagine how he would govern. After two recent scandal-plagued administrations, Illinois residents deserve better.
* And here’s Dennis Byrne’s take…
What’s Quinn trying to say? That Brady believes he didn’t have to pay taxes because he is an elected representative? Or that because Brady is an elected representative he should pay taxes that the law doesn’t require?
Should Brady not take advantage of a tax break that is provided under the Stimulus Package? Should he ignore his deductible business loses when calculating his taxes? Really, is he supposed to pay taxes on money that he doesn’t make? Should he not accept his refund? Is he supposed to pay more than he owes, and if he doesn’t is that a legitimate issue for Gov. Pat Quinn to use against Brady?
Brady’s reluctance to disclose his income taxes is a legitimate issue. That he allowed reporters only a peak at his returns is, at best, odd. It makes him look like he is trying to hide something, which he probably is because he’s in business and his competitors might find disclosure of some information useful.
But not paying taxes that he doesn’t owe is not a legitimate issue. If you don’t like tax breaks then you ought to work to change the tax code. If you can understand it.
I think everybody makes some valid points. But I’m not sure yet how this is going to play out. So far, as I noted above, the media has been pretty even-handed. But taxes are a huge issue in these-here parts, so I’m sure we’ll see a revisit soon. Your thoughts?
- OswegoDem - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 4:55 am:
Financial mismanagement by the Quinn administration will be the primary issue in this campaign. This is a bogus issue which will gain little traction except by the narrow choir still singing Quinn’s tune.
Who pays more taxes then the are legally due to pay. Certainly not journalists and political commentators. I think every journalist who writes about this issue should disclose their taxes for the past 5 years.
- Hank - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 6:38 am:
Brady didn’t pay tax because he didn’t owe any tax, yet several fed cabinet members owed taxes and “forgot” to pay them until caught. Whats good the goos etc etc
- wordslinger - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 7:47 am:
–I don’t think I’ll be alone in believing there’s something unfair about a rich guy who also draws a nice government salary but doesn’t pay any income taxes. And something phony about a guy in those circumstances who complains about taxes being too high.–
Brown sums it up about right. A core of Brady’s base was hooting a couple of weeks ago that 47% of the population doesn’t pay federal income taxes. I don’t think they considered their guy was one of them.
I imagine Quinn has photos of the talked-about Porsche and Florida condo to put together a nice spot.
- really? - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 7:52 am:
I would like more detailed information on the losses incurred by Brady’s businesses. Was it the “economy” or poor business management? Most small businesses I know of are successful in the long term due to good planning and not over reaching. I fear Brady as Gov would be Edgar lite.
- Still Gettin Twisted - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 7:59 am:
ok, Brady should have paid taxes even though he didn’t owe any?? what??
- Zoble21 - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 8:02 am:
If this is Quinn’s “smokin gun” against Brady he might want to get his resume in order.
- He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 8:22 am:
Did Quinn claim all his lodging that he paid for himself (and claims he didn’t get reimbursed)? If he did what’s the difference?
Brady did what ANY other taxpayer would do. I can’t fault him.
- fedup dem - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 8:50 am:
What those of you who post comments on this site or read those postings must realize is that the election will be decidied by the great mass of voters who don’t really care about the finer points raised here, but will simply remember that sen. brady received his legislator’s pay for 2008 and 2009, but did not have to pay any federal income tax for those years. That is whatis probably going to matter on November 2. If so, Brady is toast.
- Cindy Lou - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 8:53 am:
Brady rather sets himself up for this tax thing. Smoking Gun, no, but to stand and droan on about ‘feeding at the public trough’ while collecting a Senate paycheck and dreaming of his state pension he’s fully vested in himself and squealing the ever so old ‘tax eater’ battle cry…seems, well, a bit hypocritial.
Yeah, I get people don’t pay that don’t owe according to the legal laws. But families working two and three low wage jobs and paying taxes because they have nothing to shield them from it are going to listen for months to come from Brady about ‘already pay too much’; ’should lower min. wage to be business friendly’; blah blah.
Just seems the ticket shouter who advoids taxes by being protected by business loses, kicks the little people in the chin.
I’m waiting for the campaign ad that shows Quinn and Bailey walking down to the mailbox to send in their taxs while a shot cuts to a Brady mailbox anxiously awaiting his return. So how does Brady counter that? Do we then get an ‘infomercial’ on the whys and hows on Brady’s lack of taxes? Somehow the guy who did not have to pay any sounds a bit hollow shouting the rally cry at the head of the ticket.
Think about it…, we hear government’s too big, cut, cut, cut…but uses that same government to make things easier on himself. I get reality, but the perception others may see in it does not easily equate. His biggest error was in trying to first not disclose, he should have just laid it all out there.
- Tom Joad - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:09 am:
2006, 07 and 08 were very good years for Homebuilders. It is odd that Brady’s company had little or no income those years, in fact, it doesn’t make sense.
The stimulus package should only take into account the money made or lost by the small business itself, not on a government job. The loss carry over should not allow Brady to get bailed out by us taxpayers!
- ilrino - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:10 am:
If you’re Quinn’s campaign manager (and resumes are being accepted), you’re gonna ride the “Brady’s a rich guy who paid no taxes” horse and beat it to death for the next six months, just as Kirk is trying to do with Broadway Bank.
The campaign strategists trust that the public won’t understand the real estate meltdown issue that trapped Alexei’s family and won’t understand the stimulus and tax credit issues that gave Bill a pass on paying taxes.
Details don’t count with the electorate. We’ll see a lot of 15-second spots that say “Brady pays no taxes” in the next six months.
- the Other Anonymous - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:19 am:
Normally, this would be a huge negative for any politician. I think one reason the coverage is so “even-handed” is that Quinn doesn’t have a campaign team that can effectively exploit the issue.
- TimB - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:44 am:
By my calculations, Brady has averaged $54,272 Fed taxes and $9066 state taxes per year over the last 6 years. Some years he had huge profits which allowed his business to weather the poor years when he had no profits and recorded a loss instead. (and was not required to pay taxes) To those that have always worked for a W-2, the prospect of “paying no taxes” sounds like a devious plot. To those of us that are running a small business and collect 1099’s (no taxes withheld), the vagaries of the tax laws are real. Just because you collect $75,000 from one enterprise (Senator) doesn’t mean that you owe taxes if you lose $75,000 on another enterprise (home building). A “loss carryover” is not a “bailout by us taxpayers”. It’s a simple matter of figuring profit and loss for the individual for that tax year.
- jonbtuba - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:49 am:
How can Brady be in state office, run for governor, and NOT pay taxes? Also, how can Brady stump with the tea party while taking advantage of the federal stimulus? This takes political hypocrisy to astounding and amusing levels.
- Nick Adams - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:56 am:
Like it or not, Brady apologists, paying no taxes and getting a great pension setup by taxpayers, will be a big issue in the election. This is the image of a rich Republican knowing the loopholes, while the average guy feels like a chump because he paid his taxes on a small income.
Keep thinking this will blow over. This is a gift to Quinn that Brady will pay for over and over.
- ABCBoy - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:22 am:
I just have to laugh of the idiocy of this exchange:
==
Tim B at 9:44am says:
“By my calculations, Brady has averaged $54,272 Fed taxes and $9066 state taxes per year over the last 6 years. Some years he had huge profits which allowed his business to weather the poor years when he had no profits and recorded a loss instead. (and was not required to pay taxes) To those that have always worked for a W-2, the prospect of “paying no taxes” sounds like a devious plot. To those of us that are running a small business and collect 1099’s (no taxes withheld), the vagaries of the tax laws are real. Just because you collect $75,000 from one enterprise (Senator) doesn’t mean that you owe taxes if you lose $75,000 on another enterprise (home building). A “loss carryover” is not a “bailout by us taxpayers”. It’s a simple matter of figuring profit and loss for the individual for that tax year.”
====
Then jonbtuba at 9:49am says:
“How can Brady be in state office, run for governor, and NOT pay taxes?”
===
This nicely encapsulates the sad state that the gov race will devolve into. People who take 30 seconds to think about it realize it isn’t a big deal. People who are either hacks or alternatively put zero thought into the matter will think it’s a major issue.
And as others said on Friday, does anybody REALLY want to bet that Illinois voters will spend 30 seconds thinking about this?
This, sadly, will boost Quinn. I don’t know if it’ll get him over the top, but it will give him something to hammer.
- (Formerly) Angry Republican - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:23 am:
The Brady tax issue is an opportunity for the public to discuss in greater detail whether or not state legislators should be allowed to have a full time job in addition to their legislative duties. The idea behind a “part time legislature” is it supposedly allows the average citizen the opportunity to run for elective office, whereas a “full time legislature” would only be conducive to wealthy people running for office. If having outside income is a problem for Brady, then it should also be a problem for Madigan and every other IL politician. Maybe we need an amendment banning outside income for anyone in the state legislature; I’m sure MM would have no problem with that.
- Yeah right - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:27 am:
Hey I guess all you brady attackers are going to go out and pay an extra $10,000 in taxes when you don’t owe them next year right?
- Conservative Republican - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:29 am:
Dennis Byrne has it right. If you don’t owe any taxes, you don’t pay any. Brady’s significant business losses offset his legislative salary. In addition, due to federal tax laws which benefit lower income people, about 40% of all Americans don’t pay any income tax either. Finally, the “no taxes paid” claim only applies to two tax years, the years of lost income. This is, and will stay, a big non-issue, unless Quinn tries to demogogue it in the fall, when it will most certainly backfire on him.
- D.P. Gumby - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:29 am:
The issue is the limited disclosure and refusal to allow copying of the returns. This doesn’t allow anyone to review the decisions made by Brady and his tax team to determine what tax avoidance techniques were used. While tax avoidance is not illegal, it does reflect the philosophy of the taxpayer and, when that person is running for governor, is legitimate for public policy discussion.
- just sayin' - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:39 am:
Brady better keep the Porsche in the garage through November. That would make a nice photo for a Quinn statewide mailer.
Better yet, get on the horn to 1-877- Kars4Kids. Seriously.
Brady could borrow a line from American Idol. “Brady Gives Back (because he’s been holding back before now)”
- lincolnlover - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:39 am:
The issue would be moot if Brady were a private citizen. He did follow the tax law. Nothing out of line there. What makes him different from you and me? You and I are NOT running for governor, screaming ” Business people are being forced out of Illinois because of high taxes”. Too bad the best the dems could come up with is Quinn. Otherwise, I would be chortleing all the way to the voting booth.
- imeanreally - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:58 am:
Conservative Republican says: “Finally, the “no taxes paid” claim only applies to two tax years, the years of lost income.”
Lost income? One of those years he showed an AGI of nearly $120,000. The average joe doesn’t understand how he could pay no federal tax when he has an income like that. And that certainly isn’t “lost income” as you propose.
The Brady apologists are doing what they know is necessary…”move along, nothing to see here”. In reality, this is incredibly damaging to Brady’s platform. Many have already pointed this out…you can’t claim that the tax system is overly oppressive and crippling small business owners when you aren’t paying any taxes. Taxed Enough Already, Billy? So you don’t want to pay ANY taxes AT ALL?
Shady Bill Brady hid these numbers because he knew they would hurt him politically. It had nothing to do with hurting his business interests. Screaming from the rafters that the tax burden is crippling to business owners apparently doesn’t hold up to scrutiny when we look at Shady’s numbers.
Reality check people…Brady is preaching the party line, but his life is not a reflection of his professed political beliefs. People want authenticity. Shady is far from authentic.
- Won't Forget - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:03 am:
I think the voting public is smart enough to see this story is almost entirely spin. The headlines say, “Brady paid no taxes.” It would be more accurate to add, that he owed no taxes. It’s just silly to suggest that he should just contribute $$$ to Uncle Sam and the state in lean years anyway, just because he was smart enough save up in the good years. Who does that? Do you do that, Rich? Ridiculous.
That new home starts slacked off before the rest of the economy is well known, and materials costs skyrocketed with Katrina,, Suggesting 2006 was a result of mismanagement is a stretch.
In years Brady was doing well he paid taxes at a rate comparable to what the multi-’millionaire Obamas paid this year. And there’s no evidence he had the same ethical lapses as Obama’s merry band of tax cheat appointees.
The only story seems to be how he released the tax return information, then. Quinn can’t fairly say much aout it, as he appears to be the model for Brady’s approach.
I never liked Brady and did’t want to vote for him, but the unfair criticism has me itching to do that very thing.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:04 am:
Logic sells in politics. Simplicity rules. Especially logic that fits with voter reality.
Everyone understands that you don’t pay taxes you don’t owe. No one does.
So if Quinn is hoping that there are enough stupid voters in Illinois to change their minds from the anti-incumbant mood they are in, to supporting him because of this issue, he is both underestimating, and overestimating it at the same time, and hoping that spinning it politically will give him an edge.
The stupid vote is already anti-incumbant. They hate taxes. Trying to get them to switch to Quinn because Brady didn’t pay taxes is a wasted effort. But it will help keep some of Quinn’s campaign staffers employed and give something for his supporters to say.
Quinn is going to be sandbagged by the General Assembly to be the fall guy this November. They’ve written him off, saddling the Governor with all the crappy choices they refuse to handle, without the fiscal means of handling them. Believe you me, Brady’s non-payment of non-taxes isn’t going to be remembered, no matter how much ad money is spent on it.
- Joe from Joliet - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:07 am:
…This takes political hypocrisy to astounding and amusing levels…
Throw a bucket of water on jonbquinncampaign. That’s quite a statement from a Blagojevich/Quinn guy. I bet he believed B/Q would bring a new level of ethics to Illinois. Oh, that’s right, they did.
- just sayin' - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:20 am:
Actually a lot of people pay more taxes than they are legally required to pay. Not everyone lawyers-up to reduce their taxes to the max.
There are lots of people out there who don’t deduct all of their contributions to charity for example. They just don’t crow about it. (And no, I’m not in a position to be one of them.)
It is odd to see a senator pay no taxes at all. I wonder if anyone else in the General Assembly has that distinction?
- Jim - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:23 am:
Off the Brady tax subject but a reform gov comment, I saw Quinn pull up to the Sox game yesterday with a 3 vehicle crew. Are all 3 taxpayer-funded vehicles really necessary? How about 1? Then he goes and sits in the upper-deck like he is a man of the people, what a fraud.
- wordslinger - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:28 am:
–The stupid vote is already anti-incumbant. –
Incumbent.
- McLean Farmboy - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:31 am:
For all of the bluster and hyperbole, the real question is…will this change anyone’s mind?
I seriously doubt it. Those that liked Brady before will find a way to explain it away. Those that did not like Brady before will find a way to make this the next incarnation of Blago.
- cflly - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:40 am:
I think what end this will ultimately serve is to cut against Brady’s hoped for brand of “fighting for the little guy.”
Even if he owed no taxes, bringing in a six-figure income and not paying taxes is, on its face, a pretty neat trick. It makes him seem a savvy insider if nothign else.
It also saps Brady of the ability to rally the tea partiers. Isn’t the motto “Taxed Enough Already”? Brady isn’t taxed at all.
Most importantly, this simply gives Quinn something to hammer on for a long time. That’s critical because it helps determien the ’schoolyard bully/bullied’ dynamic that so often sets the tone for campaigns.
- Realstory - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:56 am:
No the story is that Quinn is a tax and spend liberal and whether you owe taxes or not he expects you to pay them.
Pingback Bill Brady’s Taxes | Illinois Alliance For Growth - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:57 am:
[…] Rich Miller at Cap Fax has great rundown on the diverging opinions. […]
- Vole - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 12:06 pm:
The irony of this entire Brady episode of waiting until after the primary to release his tax returns is that many and a perhaps a majority of voters including independents and democrats will be denied having the opportunity to vote for a candidate who might have given us a viable and reasonable alternative to Quinn — Dilliard. Blame it on the voters if you will, especially the tax hating, right wing supporters of Brady. I put this blame squarely on Brady for once again reducing our options for better government.
- ShadyBillBrady - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 12:14 pm:
Seems a lot of people don’t get it.
Smoking Gun? Nope, and have yet to hear anyone claim that it was/is.
Another BradyBlunder in an already growing line of them? Yep.
If he would have release them right away, might have even been less of an issue. Act like you got something to hide, then reveal them (would be shady to say this was a “release”) … and people will look for what you were hiding.
Campaigns are almost all about perception. They are not about nuance. Like it or not.
And Bill Brady has a big perception problem.
Puppy-killer, Rich Guy that Doesn’t Pay Taxes, Tea Party wannabe that took Obama stimulus money, Porsche-driver that claims he’s hurting, Ostrich-leather boot wearer that claims he walks in everyman’s shoes …
These kinds of issues are not about the base - McLean Farmboy is right - those folks will find a reason to look past it. And it’s not about winning over the opponent’s base. These issues are about the undecideds.
Campaigns are significantly about 2 things:
1. Perception
2. Undecided voters
So far, Brady seems to be hurting himself in both areas. He’s gonna have to hope enough of his base believes he’s really their guy so they’ll turn out to vote and he won’t give away what was the GOP’s to lose.
- just sayin' - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 12:21 pm:
The good news is Brady’s running mate, the young Jason Plummer only gets an allowance, so no tax issues there.
Oh just teasing. I like the kid.
- Loop Lady - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 12:25 pm:
VM: there ARE alot of voters who are stupid every where, as far as I can tell. IL has no monopoly on an ignorant electorate…the fact remains that Brady’s salary as a State legislator was not taxed because of his losses in his privately held business will stick in the craw of regular folks who still had to pay Uncle Sam despite the recession, and this fact will be trumpeted every chance the Quinn campaign has to blare it…
Brady should not have balked at releasing his returns, but now that he did, he looks like he was trying to hide a tax perk that many folks cannot use because they are not self employed…it aint illegal, but it aint man of the people neither…
- VanillaMan - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 12:55 pm:
VM: there ARE alot of voters who are stupid every where, as far as I can tell.
And it appears that a lot of them can’t spell “incumbent” either!
I have to listen to people criticize all day long. A lot of my co-workers point out how our critics are stupid because they don’t understand our reality, and it is our reality that calls the final shots.
However, I discovered years ago is what whom I called stupid, weren’t. Not only did I benefit from listening to them with respect, I better understood how our expertise in our selected field of study, blinds us with arrogance towards those without our selected field of study.
Consequentially, I have come to the conclusion that Democracy really does work because it harnesses all the expertise within a voting population - more than any elite group of experts could possibly have. I have also come to the conclusion that there really aren’t any stupid voters - just voters with differing priorities than mine, or yours.
When I referred to Brady already getting the “stupid” vote, because they are anti-incumbent, I was making an attempt to point out that voters without our selected expertise and love of all things political, have already made up their minds to vote against incumbents over any other arguments that have been made regarding this issue.
Non-payment of non-taxes? The only reason this is being discussed today is because of political spin, not because what Brady did was damaging to his campaign - those who could be spun with this, have already decided to vote against our incumbent governor.
Also, as always, it is a pleasure to read your posts!
- irish - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 1:07 pm:
Bottomline is that the voters will remember, if this is made an issue by the Dems, that Brady is getting taxpayer dollars for his Senate salary and paying no taxes on it.
I can see him taking all advantages he could on taxes on his business. However the smart thing would have been for him to separate out his State salary and pay taxes on it. Especially when he has been a perpetual campigner and should have known this could become an issue. And don’t say that is unreasonable. There are Senators, I know of one, that are independently wealthy and do not accept their Senate salary, they donate it to charity.
While none of this is illegal I think the most glaring item is that he did not realize this could be an issue, especially when he knew he was going to make public employee’s alleged exorbitant benefits an issue. This alone shows an out of touch candidate who has no idea of the “real world”. THAT is the issue that the Dems should hammer on. Look at what happened to John McCain when he did not know how many homes he owned. This elitist behavior does not sit well on candidates for public office in the current economic state.
- David Starrett - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 1:09 pm:
I want to hire Brady’s tax attorney for myself.
- irish - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 1:27 pm:
– the stupid vote is already anti incumbent –
I disagree. While some are voting anti incumbent just because they are angry. I am for voting anti- incumbent to show MJM and the rest of them that they cannot preserve the status quo by doing nothing. They need to know that they are accountable to the voters and if they decide to play games instead of doing their job. Mike got dinged back in the 90’s for supporting a tax increase so he figures he doesn’t do anything and can’t get dinged. Wrong!
Some may say this kind of thinking results in people getting into office who are not qualified and might do the wrong thing. Having them do SOMETHING would be an improvement. The bunch that is in there have not addressed the biggest issue, the budget and non -payment of obligations in the last 10 years that it has been the elephant in the room. They had their chance. Time for new blood.
- Rambler - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 1:37 pm:
Michael Madigan is widely regarded as the most powerful politician in the state — more powerful than any governor.
Where are his tax returns?
Quinn can reasonably be viewed as hypocritical until he demands to see Madigan’s returns.
- yikes - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 1:44 pm:
Bravo Bill Brady for losing money and yet still keeping people employed. How many people made a living last year because Bill Brady was willing to take money out of his own pocket to keep supporting his employees? Contrast that with others who pull millions of dollars out of their bank, bankrupt the thing and cost everyone their jobs while supporting the mob. Pretty good contrast there.
- Loop Lady - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 1:45 pm:
you go Irish-I’m with you…here’s how I see the next two to six weeks shaping up:the Republicans will do nothing but try to aid Fair Map for their own political reasons (shame on the League for being way too politically naive on this one. I’m a former LWV local president and can wag my finger. This IS partisan politics ladies disguised as good government!) The Dems will twitter until right before a Memorial Day adjournment so they can march in their parade and wave at you (but they’re really giving you the middle finger) and they will dump the responsibility for massive cuts on Quinn’s lap who will be roundly criticized by the MSM/unions/social service agencies for every decision he makes, cause no one wants to bear a reduction in funding…this is not a bad made for TV movie, it’s your state government at work for you…be grateful puppets!
- Responsa - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:04 pm:
Has Scott Lee Cohen mentioned whether he will be releasing his tax returns as a gubernatorial candidate? Has any one asked him to?
- ShadyBillBrady - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:33 pm:
==How many people made a living last year because Bill Brady was willing to take money out of his own pocket to keep supporting his employees?==
lol. Supporting his employees? You know it’s pretty much the other way around right?
And most employees in the contracting business and real estate are independent contractors … he’s not doing a whole lot to support them, let’s be honest.
I, for one, would like to see a list of which 9 employees of the 34 got to keep their jobs. Same wth the 70 of the 150. And then I’d like to see how many of them either have the Brady name.
- jake - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:36 pm:
In the “there oughta be a law” category—It would make sense for there to be legislation that state employees should pay state income tax on their state earnings; that they can’t reduce the state tax burden by declaring losses on other businesses. There is already a provision in the state income tax form whereby some Federal deductions are not allowable on the state tax form. That should be extended to business losses.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:37 pm:
I’ve seen political insiders run on their experience, and political outsiders run on their success in the private sector.
I’ve yet to see a political insider win office based on their failures in the private sector.
There are so many ways to slice and dice Brady, it boggles the mind.
Like: Maybe Brady wouldn’t have had to fire 30 people if he’d spent a little more time running his business and a little less time as a career politician.
- imeanreally - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:46 pm:
Really? Bill Brady is “supporting” his employees? You opened the door…go ask Shady to release what he actually sends out in payroll to those not named Brady in his businesses. I think you may be amazed at how little Shady is really paying others in “support”. As ShadyBillBrady pointed out, the majority of those he works with are independent contractors.
I’d love to see a list of those nine remaining employees (and as a side note, does he pay their taxes or provide healthcare?). Maybe he has a little finesse in his use of the chainsaw when it comes to budgeting in the Brady businesses…as in the chainsaw avoids any employee named Brady.
- Elliott Ness - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:54 pm:
When Adlai Stevenson II was running for President, he was told by a staffer that he would surely get the votes of all the thinking voters. He replied: “That’s not enough, we need a majority!”
- wordslinger - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 2:56 pm:
–I’ve yet to see a political insider win office based on their failures in the private sector.–
That’s bad news for another candidate this year.
- steve schnorf - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 3:14 pm:
So, was everyone on here who is down on Brady for his tax situation a big supporter of Governor Blagojevitch’s GRT, cause that’s the problem he was trying to address, he was just aiming at Walgreen’s, not Bill Brady?
- Bill - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 4:17 pm:
Now that you mention it Steve, yes I was a fan of the GRT. It sure would have been a lot better than the mess we have now.
In fact, Rod, for all his faults, was a better governor than what we have now.
- David Starrett - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 5:02 pm:
I dunno, Steve, it seems to e that the GRT was an attempt to capture revenue from growth sectors now excluded, and do it as across-the-board as possible. The formulation needed lots of refinement, and the political handling was utterly ham-handed and even counterproductive. But I think the basic concept has at least some merit if we’re ever going to address the structural nature of the State’s deficit.
- Anonymous - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 5:40 pm:
Two can play this game.
It seems very unfair for the media (e.g,. Dennis Byrne et al.) to have a prohlem with Brady allowing limited access to his tax returns when Quinn did the same exact thing last year. Last year Quinn only allowed the media a 3-hour peek.
I don’t recall the media having a problem with Quinn when he did it. Of course last year tax time he still enjoyed a lot of good will from the media. He didn’t start flip-flopping and fibbing at every turn until May and continued right on through to the primary.
If the media want to demand more access to Brady taxes then it seems only fair that they demand to more access to Quinn’s 2008 taxes.
Sorry Quinn, but people who live in glass houses…
- Hisgirlfriday - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 5:46 pm:
“Bravo Bill Brady for losing money and yet still keeping people employed. How many people made a living last year because Bill Brady was willing to take money out of his own pocket to keep supporting his employees? Contrast that with others who pull millions of dollars out of their bank, bankrupt the thing and cost everyone their jobs while supporting the mob. Pretty good contrast there.”
How exactly did EVERYONE lose their jobs at Broadway? Are their reports that MB financial fired everyone today when they assumed control and absorbed all of Broadway’s deposits? Didn’t think so.
- ShadyBillBrady - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 5:52 pm:
Yep, Anonymous, almost the same. Almost.
- Illinicpa2 - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 6:44 pm:
I do not understand everyone’s obsession with a candidate’s tax returns. I’d be willing to bet that Sen. Brady’s returns have been prepared without anything too questionable. Doesn’t every taxpayer want his or her tax return prepared showing the least possible and the correct tax liability? The Internal Revenue Code treats all taxpayers the same including politicians. Everyone thinks they pay too much and the other guy pays not enough. But—- the top 1% of income earners pay 39% of the total collected for individual income tax.
- Yawwwnnn - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 8:49 pm:
How many of the liberal whiners turned down their earned income tax credits last year?
- Sam - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 9:27 pm:
He gone!
Brady is done, gone and out.
- Chicago Cynic - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 10:06 pm:
I think people miss the point. Taxes were supposed to be a huge Brady issue. Now he will be hamstrung in how he talks about taxes because everytime he goes down that road, he’s setting himself up for mockery. Doesn’t matter which party, Republicans and Democrats hate hypocrisy. He will be royally burned by this.
- Jack - Monday, Apr 26, 10 @ 11:02 pm:
A savy business man that can beat the tax system or an oaf that can’t balance the state’s budget two years in a row. I know who will get my vote.
Obviously the liberals have totally missed the tea party message. We hate paying taxes that the liberals give away to those on the dole. Bill Brady is not on the dole and frankly I envy the fact that he didn’t have to support any idiot liberal programs these past two years.
- Beowulf - Tuesday, Apr 27, 10 @ 7:12 am:
As long as Brady has done everything with his tax returns in a legal fashion, why would I have a problem with it? Am I the new “tax morality god (or czar)” who determines “who” should have paid more taxes than they did because that is “my” personal opinion? Personally, I think Pat Quinn will soon be beating up on Bill Brady because Brady was once seen wearing brown loafers with tassels when we all know that he should be wearing only black dress shoes with shoe laces. Sheeesh!
If Brady hasn’t done anything illegal with his tax returns , then Quinn needs to drop up this deliberate political distraction, quit his incessant whining, and instead solve the state of Illinois financial problems which is what he was hired for in the first place.