Teresa Heinz Kerry, playing games with her tax returns, appears to be as much a flip flopper as her second husband, John Kerry, and she takes the public for as much of a fool as he does.
The bizarre Teresa maintained for almost a year that she could not release her tax return because to do so would be bad for her sons, because it would show their assets and income. Newspapers across the country bought this story, even though any decent tax lawyer would have told the liberal media that it was nonsense, that trust income on personal returns shows the income only for that individual and not for any other beneficiaries of the trust. The proof of that is that when she finally did release her return nothing on it indicates the income of her sons.
Also, it is well known that Teresa has personal assets of over one billion dollars so the five- million-dollar income she shows on her personal return, which would hardly be adequate to sustain John and Teresa’s lavish life style, tells you nothing about her real income.
Her planes and five large houses are owned in separate trusts belonging to her and the expenses for running them (some deductible, some not) are paid out of those trusts, which themselves pay taxes. There may be a major tax saving, however in state taxes because the trusts may be located in a state with low or no tax, rather than in high-taxing Massachusetts and the District of Columbia.
We will never know the whole truth, since Mrs. Heinz Kerry and her husband John do not want the public to know her full income or her real tax rate any more than they want the public to know what her charitable contributions–not the contribution checks she writes on the accounts from foundations set up by others–have been.
We have always questioned (but the media did not) how Sen. Kerry managed to borrow millions on one half a house (given to him by Heinz Kerry) to bail out his primary campaign in Iowa. Could it be that Mellon Bank made the loan knowing that Teresa, the banks largest depositor, would pay it back if necessary after the elections. It is very doubtful that any ordinary person could get a mortgage on one-half a house What bank would want to foreclose on such an asset.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter