Trump says his mega MAGA ballroom won't cost voters a dime. Here's why that's a lie

[Miles Archer]

Trump says his mega MAGA ballroom won't cost voters a dime. Here's why that's a lie

https://www.rawstory.com/white-house-ballroom-2674253947/

Apparently, we are supposed to be relieved that people seeking favors from Trump are paying for the ballroom rather than taxpayer dollars. As David Dayen pointed out in a piece in The American Prospect, these contributions are likely to prove very costly to the American people.

Dayen goes through the public list of donors (some are anonymous) and found off the bat the big tech companies, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon. These companies have all sorts of occasion to seek government contracts and regulatory favors from a Trump administration that has openly said it favors its friends in such matters.

*****

This naked corruption is the biggest cost to the public from Trump’s big ballroom, but it is not the only one. If we’re only concerned about the budgetary impact, it’s important to remember that taxpayers pay a price for the “generosity” of rich people. They deduct their contributions from their taxable income.

The current top tax rate is roughly 40 percent. (This includes the Medicare tax, which applies to all income of rich people.) If the full $350 million were coming from individuals, this means that we would be getting $140 million less in taxes from them because of their contributions to Trump’s mega ballroom.

[AZJonnie]

1. The point about the corruption is certainly pertinent in and of itself

But are we sure this sort of donation is tax-deductible? Doesn't seem like it should be, it's really not a charitable donation but I'm not a tax lawyer

[Miles Archer]

3. It's like that "free" Qatari jet.

Trump gets to keep the jet after leaving the White House. How is that a "charitable donation" and not a personal gift to Trump?

Show me ANY FUTURE DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT who would not be MORTIFIED to hold an "event" in Trump's bigly yuge fugly gold ballroom.

I'm not talking about leaving the 4 walls standing and gutting / remodeling the place. I'm talking about a Democratic president holding an event in there AS IS, fugly gold and all. It won't happen. So I see it as a GIFT to TRUMP from HIMSELF, and no...it should not be "deductible."

[AZJonnie]

5. The question is about whether the people making the donation for the ballroom can deduct the donation on their taxes

Which appears to be a main point made by the article.

Those monies would not be considered income for Trump himself so the point you seem to be making is moot.

However, the plane matter is an entirely different question, and a good one at that!

[Igel]

7. It's to a historical association, so yes.

But it comes off your federal income taxes to help produce an adjusted gross income. You still pay payroll tax on any payroll portion. Payroll tax =/= federal income tax.

But doing this and claiming it's a subsidy is up there with pointing out that your personal and standard deduction are actually to a decent part (unless you're in the group that pays no federal income tax) subsidies. It assumes all your income is federal income unless you're allowed to keep it; that's been historically (and by constitution and statute) backwards.

[AZJonnie]

8. I know how tax deductions work, I just wasn't sure if this would qualify as one

Thanks for clearing that up. I don't know what you're talking about with 'subsidies' but that's okay, I just had the one question

[Vinca]

2. Doesn't matter. He doesn't own the White House and can't just tear it down. He doesn't own the land at 1600

Pennsylvania Avenue and can't just build whatever he wants on it. Wish the party in charge of Congress had a ball amongst them.

[Ilsa]

11. Trump confiscated all their balls and is

building a 90,000 square foot building to put them on display.

[D_Master81]

4. Sure

and it won’t touch any of the current east wing of the White House either

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Question On This

Why would these donations be tax deductible?
The government doesn't have any sort of 501 status & the government wasn't organized as a charitable organization.
And, it shouldn't be a political donation because the government owns the property.
Seems such donations should not be exempt from taxes. They should be after tax money.

[Easterncedar]

9. It already cost us the historic treasure

[Timewas]

10. That is so untrue

It will end up costing quite a lot totear that fucking so called ballroom down and replace it with something that has some real use