One of the central doctrines of Republican leadership demands that elected and congressionally approved officials have no shame.
Corrupt officials like Thomas and Santos display arrogance in the facec of overwhelming evidence of their malfeasance. Few if any Republicans object. In Santos’ case only the Republican Congressmen in surrounding NY districts murmmered their disapproval, and then only because the fallout was effecting their chances at reelection.
This routine acceptance of corruption should effect all Republican election chances.
I am wondering why the IRS isn’t interested in these gifts? Shouldn’t the Thomases owe taxes on these? They represent unreported income in my way of thinking.
Generally the one who gives the gift pays the appropriate taxes due. The money received (or the dollar value of the gift received) is not considered « taxable » income, as the tax would be paid by Harlan Crow on a gift tax return. (I wonder if Mr. Crow’s tax returns have ever been audited by the IRS....) This should, however, be reported by the Clarence Thomas on his financial disclosure report.
Robert Goldstein is correct. Tuition paid directly to the school is not subject to gift tax. However, room & board, books, supplies, & other similar expenses that are not direct tuition costs are subject to the gift tax.
I am not up on all the IRS regulations for gift tax reporting, but generally speaking, you must file a gift tax return if you gave gifts to someone in 2022 totaling more than $16,000. Some gifts are not subject to the $16,000 annual exclusion. Four types of transfers are not subject to the gift tax: transfers to political organizations; transfers to certain exempt organizations; payments that qualify for the educational exclusion; and payments that qualify for the medical exclusion. Only individuals file a Form 709 - United States Gift Tax Return. If the gift was made by a trust, estate, partnership, or corporation, different rules apply. Also, changes are made periodically to the code, so if you are looking at prior years, you would need to examine the code for that year to assure compliance.
In short, to answer your question, if you paid the tuition for your neighbor’s child to attend a private (qualifying) school in 2022, it would not be considered a gift subject to federal income tax.
Thank you so much for that detailed and thoughtful response. I never knew there was that kind of exemption. Certainly comes in handy if you are trying to bribe someone who already makes $265,000.
So, the best lawyers made sure that the IRS rules were followed, but not the disclosure rules. Sounds like collusion. Or, will we find out that there were tax law violations? This is why I think that the IRS should be given an even greater share of the budget, because scrutinizing the taxes of Republican politician would be worthwhile. It is time to examine all Supreme Court justices taxes. Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell and MTG bear scrutiny too. I wonder why education payments are exempt. I guess because wealthy grandparents often pay for private schools when their offspring do not earn sufficient money to do so themselves. This is built into our sustaining wealth in wealthy families system. I wonder where the "adopted" son of Clarence Thomas went to university. If you have not yet donated money to ProPublica I recommend doing so. One could pay at least as much as one does to subscribe to Substack accounts that one likes. They are doing a yeoman's job of investigative reporting.
Andrew Weissman just brought up tax issues for Thomas considering the amounts of these so-called gifts. I am not a CPA, or tax attorney, but it sounds to me like there is a limit on the amount of a gift one can receive before it must be considered as income. Clarence Thomas is getting a free pass on everything, so far.
So didn’t Trump’s accountant get put in prison partly because they didn’t report his gifts? Tuition, car, apartment, etc? Was that only because he was the accountant, not necessarily the recipient of the gifts?
I wondered the same thing. Thomas was legal guardian; tuition payments look like gift income to me. But not sure on the legality / tax implications. Grandparents often pay tuition or set up college funds. Is that counted as income to the parent, or the kid?
So this kid had the financial/legal/loving support of a Supreme Court Justice and his wife - who had been raising him for years by this point - but he was somehow an “at risk youth” who needed a benefactor (ANOTHER one?) to help him out?
Lord Acton, 1887. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Alito, Thomas and Roberts are absolutely corrupted. Kavanaugh and Gorsuch aren't doing much to help the optics.
My hope is that Democrats are willing to stand in line for however long it takes to vote Republiicans out of office and then set about reforms to SCOTUS, a few impeachments, and a general spring cleaning of the three branches of government.
Jay - did you hear that the statement by Justice Roberts, in which he argues he is not required to testify before Congress because SCOTUS has its own internal ethics rules & procedures, was signed by all NINE Justices in support of Roberts' argument? I only saw one sentence about allegedly all nine having signed that statement, and I am having a hard time believing that Justices Kagan, Brown Jackson & Sotomayor would have signed it.
It is so heartbreaking to watch SCOTUS basically implode due to this corruption by Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh, and the three Justices, who seem to be ethical and NOT corrupt, would sign off on Roberts' refusal to answer Congress' questions about these violations? Am I missing something?
It makes me wonder though whether it would not be possible for a group of concerned citizens to sue to have Justices removed for a pattern of unethical behaviour not just Thomas but Alito and Roberts too. I mean although we don't elect them they are appointed, they are supposed to be above reproach after all surely the people who want to hold themselves as the final arbitrator of laws and how those laws affect the public should at all times be beyond reproach. If any one of these were a judge on a federal or local court and behaved like they have they would have been reviewed and removed but these guys are now even trying to tell us that the people who appointed them have no say over how they behave. It all seems quite ridiculous to be honest and we should have some form of recourse to change this situation
yes, but my thought was more what can the people do when you feel that both the court and congress have not done their jobs sufficiently, just voting is not going to solve this problem in any immediate future. This is a definite case of them all feeling like they hold all the power and we have no say. It's all well and good to have rules and laws but if people are only randomly held accountable for their actions then what good are those laws and if the people responsible for making and enforcing the rules are the ones getting away with the breaking of them then we have chaos. And in the case of this particular supreme court we have no check on them overturning years of legal precedents and protections just because they want to or its expedient for their rich backers at the time with no thought to how any of that affects the lives of the rest of us. Sorry for the long-winded tirade its definitely not aimed at anyone here I just feel we need a better solution we need to have these bodies be accountable for their actions and the supreme court is not the only one for sure but all cases end there and that is a serious problem if they cannot be trusted to follow the law
These entanglements keep getting worse. The fact that Justice Thomas disclosed one "donation" on behalf of his great nephew's education , but not the more significant sum from Mr. Crow is important. Why can't he be required to testify before a Congressional ethics committee if the Supreme Court has none of its own?
You are right. I guess the word "required" is a small problem... Can the legislature subpoena a Supreme Court Justice to come into a "closed door" session, say? I don't know. You have a stellar legal background, and I am just a regular lawyer, but can this just can't be ignored and have our democracy continue to function with any legitimacy? If the House was flipped, then "request" him to come in and start rumblings of impeachment proceedings... I'm desperate to come up with something!
Propublica is doing responsible old-fashioned journalism by following leads and reporting what has been found. Not the opinion based blathering we see going on in most of "main stream" media.
Also, could you trace the contemporary history of SCOTUS corruption, Jay, starting with Scalia and his 72 solicited "personal vacations", per Sen. Whitehouse?
Didn't Trump and one of his laawyer buddies get in trouble for having a kid' school paid for in lieu of salary and not paying appropriate taxes on that? Hmm.
Why on earth would the legal ward on a SCOTUS Jurist making $265,000 a year be considered "disadvantaged" or "at risk"? Crow can't even lie effectively.
One of the central doctrines of Republican leadership demands that elected and congressionally approved officials have no shame.
Corrupt officials like Thomas and Santos display arrogance in the facec of overwhelming evidence of their malfeasance. Few if any Republicans object. In Santos’ case only the Republican Congressmen in surrounding NY districts murmmered their disapproval, and then only because the fallout was effecting their chances at reelection.
This routine acceptance of corruption should effect all Republican election chances.
I get how it's hard to dislodge a Supreme Court judge, but the fact that Santos still has a job is beyond my comprehension.
I don’t understand why he hasn’t been charged for Campaign Finance, fraud, etc.
And then there’s the mysterious disappearance of Kavanaugh’s credit cards. #brettsdebts
Indeed, it is mysterious.
Let's hammer away at this issue until it is cracked open. Kavannaugh is so corrupt.
It is possible that his wealthy parents or in-laws paid his mortgage, credit cards, gambling debts, etc.
it’s also possible that Uncle Clarence isn’t the only recipient of Harlingen Crow’s largess.
I am wondering why the IRS isn’t interested in these gifts? Shouldn’t the Thomases owe taxes on these? They represent unreported income in my way of thinking.
Generally the one who gives the gift pays the appropriate taxes due. The money received (or the dollar value of the gift received) is not considered « taxable » income, as the tax would be paid by Harlan Crow on a gift tax return. (I wonder if Mr. Crow’s tax returns have ever been audited by the IRS....) This should, however, be reported by the Clarence Thomas on his financial disclosure report.
Robert Goldstein is correct. Tuition paid directly to the school is not subject to gift tax. However, room & board, books, supplies, & other similar expenses that are not direct tuition costs are subject to the gift tax.
So if I pay for my neighbor's kid to go to an expensive private school, that is not considered a gift as long as I am the one who pays the school?
I am not up on all the IRS regulations for gift tax reporting, but generally speaking, you must file a gift tax return if you gave gifts to someone in 2022 totaling more than $16,000. Some gifts are not subject to the $16,000 annual exclusion. Four types of transfers are not subject to the gift tax: transfers to political organizations; transfers to certain exempt organizations; payments that qualify for the educational exclusion; and payments that qualify for the medical exclusion. Only individuals file a Form 709 - United States Gift Tax Return. If the gift was made by a trust, estate, partnership, or corporation, different rules apply. Also, changes are made periodically to the code, so if you are looking at prior years, you would need to examine the code for that year to assure compliance.
In short, to answer your question, if you paid the tuition for your neighbor’s child to attend a private (qualifying) school in 2022, it would not be considered a gift subject to federal income tax.
Thank you so much for that detailed and thoughtful response. I never knew there was that kind of exemption. Certainly comes in handy if you are trying to bribe someone who already makes $265,000.
So, the best lawyers made sure that the IRS rules were followed, but not the disclosure rules. Sounds like collusion. Or, will we find out that there were tax law violations? This is why I think that the IRS should be given an even greater share of the budget, because scrutinizing the taxes of Republican politician would be worthwhile. It is time to examine all Supreme Court justices taxes. Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell and MTG bear scrutiny too. I wonder why education payments are exempt. I guess because wealthy grandparents often pay for private schools when their offspring do not earn sufficient money to do so themselves. This is built into our sustaining wealth in wealthy families system. I wonder where the "adopted" son of Clarence Thomas went to university. If you have not yet donated money to ProPublica I recommend doing so. One could pay at least as much as one does to subscribe to Substack accounts that one likes. They are doing a yeoman's job of investigative reporting.
And little wonder they are trying to scrape back the $87K for IRS tax fraud investigations on the highest “earners.”
It is not a taxable event for direct payment of tuition.
What about the other payments such as on the property and vacations? I am pretty sure if I won a prize of that value I would pay taxes on it.
Gifts aren’t taxable under the IRS code. If they are large enough, then the person making the gift may have to file a gift tax return.
Ironically, these being called “gifts” is kind of a joke. We know they are bribes.
Andrew Weissman just brought up tax issues for Thomas considering the amounts of these so-called gifts. I am not a CPA, or tax attorney, but it sounds to me like there is a limit on the amount of a gift one can receive before it must be considered as income. Clarence Thomas is getting a free pass on everything, so far.
Gifts are never income - they're excluded from taxable income by statute. See 26 USC 102.
(Except business gifts and gifts to employees)
I don’t believe that is true.
So didn’t Trump’s accountant get put in prison partly because they didn’t report his gifts? Tuition, car, apartment, etc? Was that only because he was the accountant, not necessarily the recipient of the gifts?
Gifts to employees are presumptively taxable compensation.
Fir a non-family member?
Yes. Thomas should have reported everything but it’s not an income tax issue
And yet, if a noted as a business expense by crow it could be written off of income and therefore reduce tax liability
You are right. Thank you for catching my mistake.
I wondered the same thing. Thomas was legal guardian; tuition payments look like gift income to me. But not sure on the legality / tax implications. Grandparents often pay tuition or set up college funds. Is that counted as income to the parent, or the kid?
So this kid had the financial/legal/loving support of a Supreme Court Justice and his wife - who had been raising him for years by this point - but he was somehow an “at risk youth” who needed a benefactor (ANOTHER one?) to help him out?
Doesn't pass the smell test to me, either.
Lord Acton, 1887. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Alito, Thomas and Roberts are absolutely corrupted. Kavanaugh and Gorsuch aren't doing much to help the optics.
My hope is that Democrats are willing to stand in line for however long it takes to vote Republiicans out of office and then set about reforms to SCOTUS, a few impeachments, and a general spring cleaning of the three branches of government.
The privilege he assumes is revolting.
Jay - did you hear that the statement by Justice Roberts, in which he argues he is not required to testify before Congress because SCOTUS has its own internal ethics rules & procedures, was signed by all NINE Justices in support of Roberts' argument? I only saw one sentence about allegedly all nine having signed that statement, and I am having a hard time believing that Justices Kagan, Brown Jackson & Sotomayor would have signed it.
It is so heartbreaking to watch SCOTUS basically implode due to this corruption by Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh, and the three Justices, who seem to be ethical and NOT corrupt, would sign off on Roberts' refusal to answer Congress' questions about these violations? Am I missing something?
It is disappointing but no longer surprising
It makes me wonder though whether it would not be possible for a group of concerned citizens to sue to have Justices removed for a pattern of unethical behaviour not just Thomas but Alito and Roberts too. I mean although we don't elect them they are appointed, they are supposed to be above reproach after all surely the people who want to hold themselves as the final arbitrator of laws and how those laws affect the public should at all times be beyond reproach. If any one of these were a judge on a federal or local court and behaved like they have they would have been reviewed and removed but these guys are now even trying to tell us that the people who appointed them have no say over how they behave. It all seems quite ridiculous to be honest and we should have some form of recourse to change this situation
The remedy is impeachment. We all know that is not viable in the present Congress
yes, but my thought was more what can the people do when you feel that both the court and congress have not done their jobs sufficiently, just voting is not going to solve this problem in any immediate future. This is a definite case of them all feeling like they hold all the power and we have no say. It's all well and good to have rules and laws but if people are only randomly held accountable for their actions then what good are those laws and if the people responsible for making and enforcing the rules are the ones getting away with the breaking of them then we have chaos. And in the case of this particular supreme court we have no check on them overturning years of legal precedents and protections just because they want to or its expedient for their rich backers at the time with no thought to how any of that affects the lives of the rest of us. Sorry for the long-winded tirade its definitely not aimed at anyone here I just feel we need a better solution we need to have these bodies be accountable for their actions and the supreme court is not the only one for sure but all cases end there and that is a serious problem if they cannot be trusted to follow the law
A nationwide citizen initiative, referendum and recall ballot measure would come in handy here!
yes
It's hard not to believe our system of government is broken and beyond repair. And that's what billions of dollars has ultimately bought.
Not beyond repair, but we must act to save it!
These entanglements keep getting worse. The fact that Justice Thomas disclosed one "donation" on behalf of his great nephew's education , but not the more significant sum from Mr. Crow is important. Why can't he be required to testify before a Congressional ethics committee if the Supreme Court has none of its own?
Enforcement of that subpoena would be very tricky given the final arbiter is the Court itself.
You are right. I guess the word "required" is a small problem... Can the legislature subpoena a Supreme Court Justice to come into a "closed door" session, say? I don't know. You have a stellar legal background, and I am just a regular lawyer, but can this just can't be ignored and have our democracy continue to function with any legitimacy? If the House was flipped, then "request" him to come in and start rumblings of impeachment proceedings... I'm desperate to come up with something!
Thomas appears to have little or no personal integrity, so he is not going to resign.
I can only imagine the yet to be unearthed kickbacks the Trump appointees to this sham of a court are getting.
Propublica is doing responsible old-fashioned journalism by following leads and reporting what has been found. Not the opinion based blathering we see going on in most of "main stream" media.
Support indepedent journalism!
Pulitzer Prize quality journalism
Also, could you trace the contemporary history of SCOTUS corruption, Jay, starting with Scalia and his 72 solicited "personal vacations", per Sen. Whitehouse?
Didn't Trump and one of his laawyer buddies get in trouble for having a kid' school paid for in lieu of salary and not paying appropriate taxes on that? Hmm.
That tuition was for Weisselberg’s grandchild I think.
Yes, but - that had to do with unreported salary and benefits.
Yes.
Why on earth would the legal ward on a SCOTUS Jurist making $265,000 a year be considered "disadvantaged" or "at risk"? Crow can't even lie effectively.
The tuition was paid by Crows company - not him personally. How did the company categorize that expense?