do you have a mortgage? Car loan? Credit card debt? You are owned too
It turns out that Trump is broke as a haint
- Thread starter DAWG1980
- Start date
do you have a mortgage? Car loan? Credit card debt? You are owned too
Which western banks have said they wouldn’t loan to the Trump Org for their developments?
To summarize the NYT story: Trump got a bunch of $ from his daddy. He lost it all, but then he got paid hundreds of millions to play a billionaire on TV. He tried to use that $ to become a real billionaire, but he lost it all again.
Analysis: Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham
It was the moment when Donald Trump's "Art of the Deal" fabulism, billionaire tycoon bluster and populist standard-bearing for forgotten Americans was revealed to be what it always looked like: a sham.www.cnn.com
No fks given, MAGA is about to get his 3rd Conservative SC Justice confirmed in less than 3 years in office.
BTW, your TDS appears to be terminal.
Oh you are just hoping against hope LOL! Trump 2020!To summarize the NYT story: Trump got a bunch of $ from his daddy. He lost it all, but then he got paid hundreds of millions to play a billionaire on TV. He tried to use that $ to become a real billionaire, but he lost it all again.
Analysis: Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham
It was the moment when Donald Trump's "Art of the Deal" fabulism, billionaire tycoon bluster and populist standard-bearing for forgotten Americans was revealed to be what it always looked like: a sham.
You should read the article(s) ... second part dropped last night.
Yeah, no. I am not a person who overdraws my ability to pay. You really need to read the articles.
You wear that disappointment well. At what point did you become a miserable person?
What does this mean? Does that make every homeowner that financed the purchase "owned"?
By that standard, so is every successful real estate owner. When you can borrow for 3% at 60% LTV, you do it. Not because you are "too broke to just pay cash". Because it is smart finance. Is Amazon "broke" for issuing corporate debt? No because it is secured by the Company and the enormous cash-flows. No different for DJT's business. Only difference is completely finance illiterate media's motivation to smear someone doing what any business owner does.
no. I noted this in response to another poster who said that "broke people can't borrow money to develop other properties" while trying to bro-splain finance, having not read the articles in question and seemingly while not knowing much about finance, at least not property deals. Land poor is when you have plenty of land but it is so deeply leveraged on the one hand, and on the other income must go to pay expenses... eventually it all comes tumbling down (unless you can find a lender who ... well... we don't know who Trump's lenders are or what they want from him, do we?)
We all know people like this, don't we? People who overextend themselves and eventually lose the family plot? No one is saying it's wrong to get creative with finance, but fraud is another thing entirely, and being president while defrauding the US government, on the one hand, with liabilities you can't account for? That's some dangerous game.
^^^^ Has not read the articles and does not know what he is talking about. ^^^^
Last edited:
Wrong. The NYT article notes (and his tax records apparently indicate) that the ~$400m is on him personally.
TBC the article(s) also note that there are tax advantages to doing it the way he has - but they come obviously with great -personal- risk.
1) Read the articles
2) I am a real estate developer / investor as well, and know a few things about it.
A personal guarantee is a part of almost every construction loan. The question is where is the loan balance relative to value? In other words, unless the value of the real estate for which the $300M of loans personally guaranteed is worth less than $300M, there is no potential liabiity to Trump personally. And unless you've been hiding under a rock for the past 10 years, you know that real estate values have sky-rocketed. Even post-COVID depending on product-type. Trump is not a high leverage borrower, and in fact brings in a lot of outside capital and plays more as a GP carried interest partner.
Give me something I should like about the Democrats their policies are awful for most Americans it's just that simpleTo summarize the NYT story: Trump got a bunch of $ from his daddy. He lost it all, but then he got paid hundreds of millions to play a billionaire on TV. He tried to use that $ to become a real billionaire, but he lost it all again.
Analysis: Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham
It was the moment when Donald Trump's "Art of the Deal" fabulism, billionaire tycoon bluster and populist standard-bearing for forgotten Americans was revealed to be what it always looked like: a sham.
He's been threatened with personal bankruptcy previously, and the point is that that's probably coming for him again, in part because he is no longer a real estate developer. He doesn't create value and hasn't for a while now. He's got nothing but the properties to pay off the debt. He's refinanced where he could, sold what he had to sell, and has no liquidity whatsoever.
As the he himself has said, "He's a name." He owns Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago outright. Not so Chicago and others. It seems he owns his golf courses outright, but those are not in particularly good shape.
Indeed, almost all of his businesses - as far as he claims - are bleeding losses that no one can explain - so either he's defrauding the government, which seems to be the case - and remember that he is President - by inflating losses, or he's in deep shit financially, which may also be true. The worst of it is indeed that we have know idea what kind of leverage borrower he is - or two whom he is indebted - and that is a risk for all of us.
Last edited:
Taxable losses as an income producing real estate owner are a given. Not an indication of low liquidity. Depreciation is not a cash expense. It is a tax deferral.
The point is that his taxes according to the New York Times article, as reported by him, suggest that he is not a net income producing real estate owner.
And I don’t doubt in the early 1990s that he was in trouble. Like every other well known and successful real estate guy. But the idea that somehow after the biggest run-up in real estate values in history, he’s now in trouble makes no sense at all. He could be the worst developer on the planet and he would still be richer today than he was 10 years ago. Significantly so.
Again - they are looking at taxable income. And they are so business illiterate they can’t even distinguish between revenue and net income. Even properties that generate $50M in cash per year often have no taxable income becAuse they are depreciable. The tax benefits of owning real estate are well known and fully priced into the price of the property or the cost to develop it.
The NYT is essentially accusing him of being a real estate investor / developer. There is nothing here. I would be much more worried about folks who got rich after becoming politicians.
They looked at the returns for all of his businesses as well. The reporting contains discussion of depreciation. As the editors not states it is: "an examination of decades of personal and corporate tax records for President Trump and his businesses in the United States and abroad."
And here's why others should read them and care: 1) "The records show a significant gap between what Mr. Trump has said to the public and what he has disclosed to federal tax authorities over many years" 2) "Mr. Trump’s ... far-flung holdings have created potential conflicts between his own financial interests and the nation’s diplomatic interests."
Ok. Then have the NYT back up their claims on documents and returns. All I know is the givens in real estate taxable versus actual distributable cash, what has been going on universally in the exact product Trump owns for the past 10 years (improving rents, occupancies, lower cap rates, higher value, discipline from lenders on leverage) points 100 percent to a NYT bullshit hit job. It would be like Fox News claiming that Jeff Bezos is broke because Amazon has very little taxable income. Completely ignorant.
He lies. All the time. Sadly.... people are numb to his lies and clearly don’t care. I am not numb. I made the mistake once of casting my vote for him. Not happening a 2nd time.
He definitely is loose with the truth. But the whole NYT tax he’s broke piece is even more dishonest.
Again, it's as if you haven't read the pieces, which you say you have and I believe you, but... The OP said Trump was broke. The New York Times did not. Indeed, the NYT article asks more questions than it answers, revealing little tidbits that have made the news and that twitterees love (the $70,000 deduction for hair styling, the $750 number two years running) but that don't in fact amount to much. The takeaways, in addition to what I posted above, are that the total picture suggests that he is in an incredibly precarious position, having lost the faith and credit of every bank in the western world, and we don't know to whom he owes money. Whoever it is (and maybe it's Javanka) has an incredible amount of power over him.
And what I’m saying is that I own a real estate investment and development shop that does the same thing on a smaller scale. And there is zero story here. Other than Trump being a real estate owner.
Yea and all the Democrats have gotten rich on life time of Government jobs.Sounds good and let's talk something else besides politics.
BTW, it's always great to see the "Bubba Army" logo.
Nice 14 million mansion Obama just bought. The income equality president I can't wait for some more these communist to get in power. What a deal for the working man
Thanks for adding nothing to the discussion. But it sounds like you made the wrong choice.
Right, and I have no doubt that your clients make their deals with banks who themselves have public disclosures. The story here is that this real estate investor is also the President of these United States and does not make his deals with banks who have public disclosures, insofar as we know, though we do know that the last bank he had dealings with has cut him off. Further, the same games that real estate investors play with tax codes at a smaller scale, here writ large, equate to greater exposure - including personal exposure - as well as legal exposure, again on a vast sprawling scale. I guess we are all past the point of talking ethics when it comes to Trump, but there was a reason that Jimmy Carter was forced to give up his peanut farm. It's a story, potentially a very big story, and a liability for the United States of America, its citizens, and the world at this point.
Non story. Trump has plenty of real ones. This isn’t one. He owns and develops real estate. And borrows from the same life companies, banks, and international capital shops we all do. Next.
I am not a big fan of Trump, have been in real estate development my whole career, specifically the banking, finance, and capital side of the business, and agree with you that this is a non-story. The NYTimes article confuses and conflates tax losses and actual business losses, exaggerates the impact of having $450MM of loans due in the next few years, and sensationalizes what it actually means in years when Trump has and hasn't paid taxes. It is painful to hear people in the media, and on this very thread, who so confidently speak on a subject that they so very clearly have no clue about.
I find it interesting how those on the left talk themselves in circles on Trump's finances. They say he is bad at business and broke, yet in the same breath say he is not paying enough in taxes. Trump is (probably) in a worse financial situation now than when he took office, and the left wants to hold that against him. Regardless of what you think about Trump as a person, his financial situation seems more admirable to me than career politicians like the Clintons, Obamas, Bidens, and I'm sure many on the republican side, gaining significant, generational wealth by leveraging their time served in office, not because of any business endeavors, entrepreneurial accomplishments, or means that have had an impact on the economy. These politicians have gotten rich through book publishing, speaking engagements, etc - ways that effectively create zero jobs, don't enhance the broader economy, or create wealth for others.
Last edited:
Furthermore any taxes paid, or lack thereof are a result of at risk already taxed capital invested and going to work. No different than Warren Buffet - other than any management or development fees earned, he isn’t gonna pay a lot of taxes until he sells his portfolio or dies. And to those who say that’s unfair, the tax benefits of owning cash flowing real estate are well known and priced into the cost of acquisition or development. Watching non-business media types discuss this kind of stuff would be like listening to The Today Show go in depth on Georgia’s defensive scheme.
To summarize the NYT story: Trump got a bunch of $ from his daddy. He lost it all, but then he got paid hundreds of millions to play a billionaire on TV. He tried to use that $ to become a real billionaire, but he lost it all again.
Analysis: Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham
It was the moment when Donald Trump's "Art of the Deal" fabulism, billionaire tycoon bluster and populist standard-bearing for forgotten Americans was revealed to be what it always looked like: a sham.
I guess that's why he doesn't draw a salary ? Right ???
