What Romney’s charitable giving should mean for voters

Two things about Mitt Romney’s tax returns, released last week, stand out like a spotlight on a dark night. The first is the amount he gave to charity in 2011 — $4,020,772, or 30 percent of his income. The other, more stunning, item is that he claimed only $2.25 million of this because he didn’t want to be pushed into a lower tax bracket.

Of course, he probably did this for political reasons, knowing full well he would be running for president in 2012, putting him under close scrutiny.

But politics also seems to saturate President Barack Obama’s tax returns. He gave 21.8 percent of his sizeable (by average American standards) income to charity, according to his 2011 returns.

That’s an impressive amount, as was the 14 percent in 2010 and the 25.1 percent in 2009, when he donated his entire Nobel Peace Prize earnings to charities.

But go back to the days before he was contemplating the White House and you get a different picture. As this Washington Post piece reports, Obama gave 1.2 percent in 2004, 1.4 percent in ’03 and 0.4 percent in ’02.

Romney hasn’t released tax returns prior to ’11, but his campaign says he averaged giving 13.5 percent of his income to charity over the last 20 years.

Reaction to this has been fairly muted from the left, while journalists more sympathetic to Romney have weighed in with admiration. This piece by John Podhoretz of the New York Post, said, “Mitt Romney is an extraordinarily, remarkably, astonishingly generous man. A good man. Maybe even a great man.

“That is all. There is no ‘but.’ Anyone who says otherwise is ignorant, stupid or a liar.”

Podhoretz said it would be wrong to cynically claim Romney’s charity is nothing more than a tax shelter. Nothing is being sheltered. Once the money is given to charity, it is gone. All you get is a deduction that, at the highest marginal rate, means you are excused from paying taxes on 35 percent of the money you gave away.

Over 20 years, he writes, this would likely mean the Romneys gave up $30 million in income to charity.

Brian Siegel, writing in the Daily Illini, the student paper of the University of Illinois, took Obama campaign manager David Axelrod to task for criticizing Romney for paying a higher tax rate than he ought to have.

“Let me get this straight, we are supposed to be mad that he didn’t claim all of his refund for the charitable contributions he made? I almost feel bad for Romney. He’s damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. God forbid he takes his full tax break and his effective tax rate dips below 10 percent — it would be political suicide.”

In truth, this is a minor side-note to the presidential campaign of 2012. Even to compare charitable contributions among candidates seems a bit crass. They can serve as a window to a person true character, but that window reveals only a small bit of what might be valuable as leader of the free world. My guess is many of us know some extremely generous people we otherwise wouldn’t trust with an arsenal of nuclear weapons or with crafting a nation’s fiscal policy or dealing with Iran.

Romney’s reluctance to release these returns, however, is curious. It’s no surprise that he’s an extremely wealthy man, or that much of his income is derived from investments that entitle him to a lower tax rate. However, he seems to have a sense of modesty about his contributions, entirely in keeping with his religion, that makes him reluctant to talk about how much he gives.

Categories: Uncategorized

About the Author

Jay Evensen

Jay Evensen is the Senior Editorial Columnist for the Deseret News. He has 32 years of journalism experience covering politics and a variety of other assignments at news organizations ranging from United Press International in New York City to the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Deseret News, where he has worked since 1986. During that time, he has won numerous local, regional and national awards. Most recently, he was given the Cameron Duncan Media Award, given annually in Washington, D.C., by the advocacy group RESULTS, to the journalist judged to have done the most to further the cause of the world's poorest people.

5 comments

  1. Bot

    Let’s summarize Mitt Romney’s charitable history:

    Volunteer campaign worker for his dad’s gubernatorial campaign 1 year.

    Unpaid intern in Governor’s office 8 years.

    Mormon missionary in Paris 2 years.

    Unpaid bishop and stake president for 10 years.

    Took no salary as president of the Salt Lake Olympics 3 years.

    No salary as MA governor 4 years.

    Gave his ENTIRE INHERITANCE to charity.

    That’s a grand total of 28 years of unpaid service to his country, his community and his church. Why? Because that’s the kind of man Mitt Romney is.

    And he’ll show you his:

    1) Un-doctored Birth Certificate!

    2) College transcripts! Mitt did not claim he was a foreign student because his father was born in Mexico.

    3) Law degree!

    4) Un-doctored Draft notice!

    5) And un-doctored Social Security card, and what state it’s registered in!

    When was the last time we elected a politician of this character, intellect, experience and integrity?

  2. LDS Liberal

    Bill and Melinda Gates are using what God blessed them with to vaccinate children, improve agriculture, provide sanitation, and pregnant women with pronatal care.

    Jon and Karen Huntsman Sr. are using what God blessed them with to treat and find a cure for Cancer.

    Mitt Romney is hiding what God blessed him with in the Caymen Islands, and Swiss Bank accounts and collects money from other people to make himself President of the United States.

    Jay – You obviously missed the $1.1 million Mitt Romney gave to the LDS Church as a charitable contribution, on his $13.7 million in earnings.
    You do the math.

  3. CallieG

    I don’t think anyone should count money given to a church as a “charitable” contribution, especially when it’s required as a condition of one’s membership in that church. Churches aren’t charities. Yes, some provide charitable services, but most are entirely self-serving.

    • I take issue with what you say, given that churches, and believers, have charitable missions that reach to the soul as well as to temporal needs. But one thing you said is factually incorrect. Mitt Romney’s religion does not require tithing as a condition of membership. As a fellow member of his church, I can tell you no one gets excommunicated for not paying tithing. No one would know whether you are paying it or not.

  4. RandySes

    Navigating the RIP Tide: Print Workflow Software Comes in All Shapes, Sizes, and Capabilities Office Supplies printing in china Looking at this very fuzzy picture again, this deeper and long-term agreement are going to be a substantial advantage for Komori IF the Nanographic process will take off as being the Landa people are banking it can. The other analog press manufacturers will have to fund parallel development tracks (Nanography and Analog) without generating any revenue from your Nano efforts, where Komori are going to be earning income from both efforts and come with an inside track with Nanography. Komori has a great packaging and commercial print installed base, a good sales staff and is particularly one of the strongest financially in the analog press manufacturers. This alliance usually be considered a win-win for both companies and bodes well to the Landa release per year from now. ,Esko-Graphics, A Business Model for that Future
    by Stewart Partridge, Web Consulting Inc June 23, 2003 — The year 2003 marks the tenth anniversary of when wide format digital printing, mainly within the guise of 200-dpi electrostatic and 300-dpi inkjet printers, first seriously entered the print market as being a short-run production technique. Originally – by making use of expensive specialty media with inappropriate inks and toners, printed by plotters never designed for graphics applications – repro houses, photo labs, newly emerging graphics service bureaus, as well as other digital print providers were capable of create and serve a new market, plus support existing sectors like exhibition and event graphics. Over the final decade, inkjet printing has emerged to get a serious printing technology, and after this took its rightful place alongside offset, screen, flexo and gravure. In most developed countries, Web Consulting’s studies have shown that inkjet has captured typically 14-17% in the wide format graphics sector by volume, and far more by value. In certain developing graphics markets such the outdoor advertising industry in China, inkjet printing has actually become bigger than screen printing and offset together, capturing >55% business. The good news is that in western world, inkjet printing is not a threat to offset printers or offset printing. Perhaps that is certainly why worldwide, so few offset printers (well under 3%) have adopted wide format inkjet technology as anything apart from a convenient proofing tool. The installed base of inkjet proofing devices is going to grow steadily, since it accompanies the in-plant adoption of CTP devices by the more professional offset printers. The more creative offset printers are now making use of their inkjet proofers as marketing tools, utilizing spare proofing department capacity to create full-colour mock-ups to assist their sellers win new offset business. But even now, many offset printers usually do not consider wide format inkjet printing as anything apart from a pokey and expensive print tool that requires dedicated papers and media. They usually do not believe it’s relevant on their business. This is a unique debate. Do offset printers exist to make offset prints? Or would they exist to produce money? Other traditional types of printers and technology end-users never have been so reticent. The more visionary screen printers, signmakers, professional photolabs and repro companies have adopted inkjet as well as other digital technologies, and find that they make considerably higher margins from digital output than using their traditional core business. This is causing a rethink among these lenders, since they reconsider their business strategy (or write one for the new….) against a more technology-independent model. A great deal of printers now call themselves something totally new, and think differently. And a rise in the order book is not greeted having an auto response to venture out and buy another faster and better screen or offset press. For some, flexible production could be the name of the newest game. Among most offset printers, shorter run wide format colour work is not a tremendous part of the business, and they may happen to be right to shun inkjet within the past. But times are changing, and inkjet is trying with new capabilities. Current examples will be the rapid emergence and adoption of the latest inkjet printers that print directly onto pressure-sensitive vinyl as well as rigid substrates like display boards, using solvent-based or UV-curable ink sets. For some applications, this can get rid of the dependence on high-cost, branded specialty media, and the finishing steps of encapsulation, lamination or mounting onto display board. Cost will be squeezed out with the family of inkjet processes, preparing them as the economy recovers to the next major growth phase. I am not suggesting that many offset printer should step out and purchase an inkjet machine, or invest in the technology tomorrow. But perhaps enough time is right to get a re-evaluation. Take a serious look in the wide selection of inkjet print devices and systems that vary from $5,000 to $1 million. But if it is your first digital machine, do not buy the expensive printer! Experience shows that it is better to move through your minimum six-month learning curve (some would say learning cliff) having a $10,000 machine than $500,000 – then you’ll be able to move upstream once the business, your production staff, sales personnel and industry is ready. One of the best ways to investigate the possibilities for making use of inkjet output with your customers are to view the device first hand, operating as you watch, so you are able to evaluate output speed, print quality, media flexibility, operator convenience and discuss operating costs. A unique opportunity can be acquired in the upcoming GRAPH EXPO and CONVERTING EXPO, September 28 – October 1, at McCormick Place South, Chicago, IL. The Wide Format Pavilion as of this leading major tradeshow for printers and graphic communications professionals allows visitors to see a wide variety of digital printing equipment in operation, compare models, sizes and speeds, and examine practical demonstrations. More information around the pavilion and also the event may be found at http://www.graphexpo.com ,Book Printing Box Printing
    printing-in-china.net

Leave a comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.

*