• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

DeSantis transforming Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

Not so fun when the rabbit gets the gun, is it?

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Michigan is a great lesson for Dems everywhere: when you have power…use it!

Even though I know this is a bad idea, I’m off to do it anyway!

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

The revolution will be supervised.

Let’s not be the monsters we hate.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

“In the future, this lab will be a museum. don’t touch it.”

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

When we show up, we win.

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

The gop is a fucking disgrace.

Marge, god is saying you’re stupid.

Nothing says ‘pro-life’ like letting children go hungry.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

In after Baud. Damn.

They’re not red states to be hated; they are voter suppression states to be fixed.

I wonder if trump will be tried as an adult.

Anyone who bans teaching American history has no right to shape America’s future.

We’ll be taking my thoughts and prayers to the ballot box.

Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / An Unexamined Scandal / The Big(ger) Payback

The Big(ger) Payback

by Zandar|  June 28, 201111:03 am| 85 Comments

This post is in: An Unexamined Scandal, Show Us on the Doll Where the Invisible Hand Touched You, Ever Get The Feeling You've Been Cheated?, I Can't Believe We're Losing to These People

FacebookTweetEmail

Looks like Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, the man who took down Russ Feingold last year, has yet to answer some extremely interesting questions as to how he did it and with what money.

Last week the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel started asking uncomfortable questions about $10 million in deferred compensation Johnson received from his former company, Pacur, weeks after his $9 million self-financed successful 2010 campaign came to an end.

For those of you playing the home version, even in a post Citizens United world, direct corporate contributions to a candidate is a no-no, especially when the corporation in question employs the candidate.  The $10 million just happened to cover the cost of Johnson’s campaign, which Johnson says is a complete coincidence.  If that’s true, then Johnson surely has a written agreement with the company covering the deferred compensation, yes?

So far Johnson has not produced a written deferred compensation agreement that was signed and dated before he launched his campaign. Absent such an agreement, Johnson could face serious charges that he violated campaign-finance laws barring direct corporate funding of federal candidates, election law experts tell TPM.

Arent Fox’s Brett Kappel, an election law attorney, said evidence of a written agreement before Johnson ran for the Senate is critical to prove he did not rely on corporate funds for his campaign.

Well then, that might be a problem if the FEC takes a look at…

Even though watchdogs are raising serious red flags over Johnson’s deferred compensation, they’re not counting on the FEC, a broken agency that either deadlocks over critical and controversial decisions or fails to take up cases at all.

Never the hell mind.  This ledger domain legerdemain is just how the Galt’s Gulch Bandits operate. Any of them will tell you the real problem would be the FEC existing at all.  Smaller government means there’s nobody to complain to…well, unless a Democrat gave the appearance of conflict of interest, that is.

Best part is the guy who had $9 mil to spend on his own Senate seat and getting $10 mil payback is a real salt-of-the-earth, Real ‘Murican hero.

[UPDATE 12:30 PM]  Didn’t Blago just get convicted of trying to sell a Senate seat?  Buying one seems to be pretty okay by comparison, IOKIYAR.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Open Thread
Next Post: Some Dog »

Reader Interactions

85Comments

  1. 1.

    4jkb4ia

    June 28, 2011 at 11:05 am

    Ooh, nice!

    Almost back to the days of “The Treason of the Senate” when a random corporate mogul could just buy a seat.

  2. 2.

    evinfuilt

    June 28, 2011 at 11:09 am

    The Republican Party is bought and paid for, and no one is getting in the way of that. Regulations and oversight are things of the past (except if its to prevent the eroding of the power already paid for.) Corporate owned Democracy, thats what we have.

  3. 3.

    Yevgraf

    June 28, 2011 at 11:10 am

    If the SCOTUS hears the appeal today, the vote is 5-4 striking down the direct corporate contribution ban.

    The Perry/Palin Administration SCOTUS will strike the direct contribution ban on a 7-2 vote.

  4. 4.

    artem1s

    June 28, 2011 at 11:12 am

    even in a post Citizens United world, direct corporate contributions to a candidate is a no-no, especially when the corporation in question employs the candidate.

    yea, but we’re just a 5/4 vote away from this being declared speech too dontchaknow! IOKIYAR!

    besides, pretty soon the company will just BE the candidate so everything is good. nothing to see here.

  5. 5.

    piratedan

    June 28, 2011 at 11:13 am

    strange how these questions always show up AFTER the Republican is elected, how about a bit of journalistic due diligence BEFORE the election guys, especially for guys like this who show up out of nowhere.

  6. 6.

    Davis X. Machina

    June 28, 2011 at 11:13 am

    The Impairment of Contracts clause in the Constitution will prevent Johnson from losing his seat, come what may. Pacur bought him, fair and square, and unless they can be made whole some way, say, by being given another, equally valuable Senator, there’s also the Takings clause to worry about.

  7. 7.

    Bullsmith

    June 28, 2011 at 11:15 am

    Backdating solves the problem, I presume. IOKIAR after all.

  8. 8.

    Timothy Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)

    June 28, 2011 at 11:16 am

    Anyone know why, three years into a Democratic administration, the FEC remains so pathetically ineffectual?

    Serious question.

  9. 9.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    June 28, 2011 at 11:17 am

    $10 million in vs. $9 million out. At least he was smart enough to turn a profit on the deal.

  10. 10.

    piratedan

    June 28, 2011 at 11:23 am

    @8 maybe because roughly 30% of all this administrations nominees for various government positions are still held up in the Senate thanks to the filibustering of Sens Kyl and McConnell and their abuse of the secret hold process.

  11. 11.

    arguingwithsignposts

    June 28, 2011 at 11:24 am

    @T,I:

    Anyone know why, three years into a Democratic administration, the FEC remains so pathetically ineffectual?

    From the FEC web site:

    The Commission is made up of six members, who are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Each member serves a six-year term, and two seats are subject to appointment every two years. By law, no more than three Commissioners can be members of the same political party, and at least four votes are required for any official Commission action

    Do you really need to ask that question?

  12. 12.

    Jim C.

    June 28, 2011 at 11:24 am

    @8

    Reasonable question. I guess the only answer I can hazard would be some combination of Republican obstructionism and Obama having such a backlog of broken crap to fix when he took over after 8 years of Bush.

    Just a guess here but when a dam is leaking from 50 different spots it’s hard to plug those holes with only 10 fingers and 10 toes.

  13. 13.

    Jim C.

    June 28, 2011 at 11:25 am

    Ah.

    I see by #11 that my guess was an accurate one.

  14. 14.

    SteveM

    June 28, 2011 at 11:25 am

    The Perry/Palin Administration SCOTUS will strike the direct contribution ban on a 7-2 vote.

    Let’s play Guess the Future GOP SCOTUS Picks. Coulter? Bachmann? Sekulow? Cuccinelli?

  15. 15.

    cleek

    June 28, 2011 at 11:26 am

    here’s a new SCOTUS bad decision that makes Citizens United look meek.

  16. 16.

    Martin

    June 28, 2011 at 11:31 am

    Remember, Hans von Spakovsky was a recess appointee by Bush to the FEC. Half the FEC feels that voter fraud means anyone registered Democrat arriving at a polling place.

  17. 17.

    arguingwithsignposts

    June 28, 2011 at 11:33 am

    @SteveM:

    Let’s play Guess the Future GOP SCOTUS Picks. Coulter? Bachmann? Sekulow? Cuccinelli?

    Don’t you know, SteveM? Obama = Bush. Kagan has been a remarkable liberal voice in her time on the court. Sotomayor too. Anyone who doesn’t think it’s crucial to re-elect Obama in 2012 is an idiot.

  18. 18.

    Shalimar

    June 28, 2011 at 11:33 am

    Tim, how would you expect the Democratic administration to have any influence on the FEC if Obama can’t make appointments? Terms for 5 of the 6 commissioners have expired, but no replacements are on the way due to legislative deadlock. Translation, Republicans like the FEC just the way it is.

  19. 19.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    June 28, 2011 at 11:33 am

    @cleek #15:

    If God had wanted poor people to be able to afford political speech, he would have made them rich. It is obviously unconstitutional for the govt to step in to try to alter the results of natural law. Doh.

    Next up: Food Stamps are unconstitutional because giving free food to poor people devalues the lobster and caviar of the rich, depriving them of their property without the benefit of due process.

  20. 20.

    some other guy

    June 28, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Best part is the guy who had $9 mil to spend on his own Senate seat and getting $10 mil payback is a real salt-of-the-earth, Real ‘Murican hero.

    Damned straight. You elitist liberals need to stop looking down your nose at these oppressed and downtrodden millionaires. Now those fat cat public school teachers, on the other hand…

  21. 21.

    Han's Solo

    June 28, 2011 at 11:43 am

    Bullsmith @ 7 is correct. If there isn’t a deferred compensation agreement dated to before the election now, there will be in a few short days.

  22. 22.

    Mark B

    June 28, 2011 at 11:44 am

    I’m sorry, he hasn’t twittered any pictures of his junk has he? He could have bought a whole lot of junk pictures with that $10 million payday, but instead he bought a senate seat. Waste of money.

  23. 23.

    Comrade Javamanphil

    June 28, 2011 at 11:46 am

    @piratedan It pains me mightily to do so but in this case the media deserves a defense. It would literally be impossible to have known before the election that he was going to back compensate himself after the election. They did try to probe why some of his company’s employees were on the Wisconsin low income health plan (BadgerCare, I believe) but I don’t know how big it played in the state.

  24. 24.

    Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937

    June 28, 2011 at 11:46 am

    Shouldn’t we conclude that if Blagojevich didn’t try to sell Obama’s Senate seat then he would have been incompetent?

  25. 25.

    me

    June 28, 2011 at 11:47 am

    @cleek: Well, on the bright side, they could’ve ended public financing entirely.

  26. 26.

    Mark B

    June 28, 2011 at 11:47 am

    Anyone know why, three years into a Democratic administration, the FEC remains so pathetically ineffectual?

    The FEC is pseudo-nonpartisan, but I believe it’s still mostly composed of Bush appointees. But he was never able to sneak Hans Spakovsky past the Senate, so at least there’s that.

    On Edit: I see I’m just repeating information offered earlier in the thread. Carry on.

  27. 27.

    Ash Can

    June 28, 2011 at 11:51 am

    I agree that it would have been dandy if the MJS had unearthed this gem about two weeks before the election. As things stand, however, I have to wonder if this story is showing up in a broader context of folks in Wisconsin thinking, “The current Republicans are such shit heels, I wonder what else they’re pulling.” In other words, maybe the digging into this guy’s past that the MJS is doing now has been prompted by a general atmosphere in Wisconsin of mistrust of Republican politicians. If so, I can’t help but feel glad that the people of Wisconsin, at least, are waking up to what the GOP is really up to these days.

  28. 28.

    Han's Solo

    June 28, 2011 at 11:51 am

    Does it make any sense to anyone that people who proudly and loudly proclaim they are “Businessmen” are willing to pay 10 million dollars for a job that pays, what, a couple hundred thousand a year? The ROI (return on investment) on that money is really crappy unless you plan on stealing the government blind once in office.

  29. 29.

    JPL

    June 28, 2011 at 11:52 am

    Bullsmith @ 7 is correct. If there isn’t a deferred compensation agreement dated to before the election now, there will be in a few short days.

    I have to agree with hans statement and add one more detail, the media will report that the dems were mean to poor Sen. Johnson.

  30. 30.

    Guster

    June 28, 2011 at 11:53 am

    “By law, no more than three Commissioners can be members of the same political party.”

    Paging the Green Party …

  31. 31.

    the fenian

    June 28, 2011 at 11:57 am

    That’s a truly terrible situation with the FEC. The president should probably say something about it, repeatedly, and loudly.

  32. 32.

    PeakVT

    June 28, 2011 at 11:57 am

    especially when the corporation in question employs the candidate.

    Not to defend Johnson, but he owns the company, AFAICT. The only difference between Johnson and Bloomberg is that the latter took enough money out of his company to run for office before actually running for office. Johnson was sloppy and forgot to do that.

    The ability of people to use their personal fortune to run for office is why I think limiting corporate money in politics is would only be a partial solution. It would prohibit the explicit purchase of candidates by corporations, but having executives or former executives run would produce basically the same results.

  33. 33.

    shortstop

    June 28, 2011 at 11:57 am

    strange how these questions always show up AFTER the Republican is elected, how about a bit of journalistic due diligence BEFORE the election guys

    Because he got the $10 million after the election. See post above.

    Not that your point in general doesn’t stand.

  34. 34.

    daveNYC

    June 28, 2011 at 11:58 am

    Does it make any sense to anyone that people who proudly and loudly proclaim they are “Businessmen” are willing to pay 10 million dollars for a job that pays, what, a couple hundred thousand a year? The ROI (return on investment) on that money is really crappy unless you plan on stealing the government blind once in office.

    That just means that he’s a super awesome Galtian overlord, since he’s willing to sacrifice so much in order to save others from the crushing oppression of the government. Sacrifice like that is what Real Americans do.

  35. 35.

    ant

    June 28, 2011 at 12:01 pm

    damn, yall are a cynical bunch.

    what a turd, to replace Feingold.

  36. 36.

    Pococurante

    June 28, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    No surprise. Isn’t this sort of thing the intended outcome from the Supreme Court’s last two rulings on campaign finance?

  37. 37.

    Han's Solo

    June 28, 2011 at 12:04 pm

    daveNYC – I like the way you snark.

  38. 38.

    arguingwithsignposts

    June 28, 2011 at 12:04 pm

    @ant:

    damn, yall are a cynical bunch

    can you provide some evidence why we shouldn’t be? Seriously.

  39. 39.

    KG

    June 28, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Even if an agreement is produced at this point, don’t count on it being worth more than the paper it’s written on. Old rule of discovery when it comes to the production of corporate records: they are good from the day they are produced on, and not a moment sooner.

  40. 40.

    shortstop

    June 28, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Does it make any sense to anyone that people who proudly and loudly proclaim they are “Businessmen” are willing to pay 10 million dollars for a job that pays, what, a couple hundred thousand a year? The ROI (return on investment) on that money is really crappy unless you plan on stealing the government blind once in office.

    It’s not about the dinky senatorial salary. It’s about what happens after you leave the senate, a lot of things that pay a hell of a lot: lobbying gigs, board seats, speaking and “consulting” fees, willing investors/partners in future corporate enterprises, stock options, etc. It’s about the nearly limitless lifelong political and corporate power and influence that accrue to members of this very exclusive club.

  41. 41.

    burnspbesq

    June 28, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    @ Han’s Solo:

    “If there isn’t a deferred compensation agreement dated to before the election now, there will be in a few short days.”

    There are a surprising number of ways to detect backdating.

    You’d be amazed how many people forget to scrub the metadata from the Word file, and get caught that way.

    In this case, he may have backdated the deferred comp agreement, but the funds were transferred when they were transferred, and there are almost certain to be witnesses who can testify as to when things were done.

    There’s a famous U.S. Tax Court case, Medieval Attractions, where the IRS sent somebody to Curacao to look at the corporate registry, and found out that the Netherlands Antilles corporation that supposedly owned the valuable IP wasn’t created until four days after the date of the transfer agreement.

  42. 42.

    Yutsano

    June 28, 2011 at 12:13 pm

    the IRS sent somebody to Curacao to look at the corporate registry

    Now how come I can’t get gigs like that? :)

  43. 43.

    shortstop

    June 28, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    There’s a famous U.S. Tax Court case, Medieval Attractions, where the IRS sent somebody to Curacao to look at the corporate registry, and found out that the Netherlands Antilles corporation that supposedly was the transferee of the valuable IP wasn’t created until four days after the date of the transfer agreement.

    In my defense, the diving is so good there that I just didn’t get to business until a few days after I’d arrived. I never thought they’d really look.

  44. 44.

    Martin

    June 28, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    @cleek:

    From the dissent:

    Some people might call that chutzpah.

    Remember when the left was busy shitting themselves that Soto and Kagan were too far right? And further, that Obama had fucked up by nominating that blank slate, Kagan.

    [sigh] Good times…

  45. 45.

    Han's Solo

    June 28, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    burnspbesq @ 41 – Yes there are. However, though I’ve never been involved with anything like it myself, companies routinely backdate certain documents when under audit. It isn’t legal, and as you’ve pointed out there are ways of detecting it, but it happens all the same.

    Sure, if the “authorities” really wanted to push the case they could detect abnormalities with a post dated contract, but that would take a level of commitment we are unlikely to see. That kind of thing takes expertise, and expertise cost money.

    I don’t expect anything to come of this. FSM do I ever hope I’m wrong.

  46. 46.

    JGabriel

    June 28, 2011 at 12:21 pm

    piratedan:

    strange how these questions always show up AFTER the Republican is elected, how about a bit of journalistic due diligence BEFORE the election guys…

    Well, Ron Johnson didn’t pay himself the $10 mil until after the election. Kind of hard for the press to pick up on that one ahead of time.

    .

  47. 47.

    piratedan

    June 28, 2011 at 12:28 pm

    @23 and @46

    ty for catching my gaffe, guess I’ve just been reading about too many nutjobs that are just now entering the national consciousness (our gal pal Michy for one) that I wrongly categorized it as a “hoocouldanode” moment.

  48. 48.

    Linda Featheringill

    June 28, 2011 at 12:33 pm

    I have a question about the Supreme ruling on public financing of political campaigns in Arizona.

    Does that mean that the public financing cannot happen any more?

  49. 49.

    Southern Beale

    June 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm

    Speaking of Citizens United ….

    “A corporation is a legal person created by state statute that can be used as a fall guy, a servant, a good friend or a decoy,” the company’s website boasts. “A person you control… yet cannot be held accountable for its actions. Imagine the possibilities!”

    Imagine!

  50. 50.

    PeakVT

    June 28, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    @Linda – my understanding is, no, it only means there can’t be an escalation of a public subsidy based on what a self-financed candidate spends. AZ tried to both ward off self-financed candidates and keep the costs low by having a low initial subsidy that would increase based on certain criteria. Now they can either try to keep costs low, or provide a much bigger initial subsidy to discourage self-financed candidates.

  51. 51.

    MonkeyBoy

    June 28, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    I’ve often heard small businessmen brag about what a wonderful tax dodge owning a business is. You can arrange things so that much of your personal expenses become deductible business expenses – most of vacations can be
    written off, etc. [ I think it was the WSJ that recently analyzed flight plans of business owned jets and planes and found a huge number of “business” flights were to vacation destinations. ]

    The “creative” class deserves their name in part for their use of creative accounting.

    Ron Johnson may have just been a bit sloppy about maintaining the fiction that his company is distinct from his person.

  52. 52.

    Dennis SGMM

    June 28, 2011 at 12:46 pm

    It’s a truism that those who are present at the occurrence of major historical change often fail to recognize it. In this case, I think that we’ll be able to safely date the end of American democracy to the innovations of the Roberts court.

  53. 53.

    Southern Beale

    June 28, 2011 at 12:48 pm

    @MonkeyBoy:

    I’ve often heard small businessmen brag about what a wonderful tax dodge owning a business is. You can arrange things so that much of your personal expenses become deductible business expenses…

    Oh shoot, I have a friend who had her own PR business and she wrote off expensive oriental rugs for her house as business furnishings.

  54. 54.

    The Spy Who Loved Me

    June 28, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    I’m a little confused over the outrage. The company in question was private, and Johnson owned it outright, along with his wife. When you own the company, you can pay yourself however much you want and in whatever manner you deem appropriate. It would be different if it had been a publicly owned corporation, with this possibly violating campaign finance laws if there was no deferred compensation agreement in place, but that isn’t the situation here.

  55. 55.

    burnspbesq

    June 28, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    @ shortstop:

    “In my defense, the diving is so good there that I just didn’t get to business until a few days after I’d arrived.”

    Somehow, I don’t think that explanation is going to keep your malpractice insurance carrier from denying coverage. ;-)

  56. 56.

    bkny

    June 28, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    be sure to read the nyt piece on rep mica and the hundreds of millions of dollars he’s gotten for a train that will daily carry 2000 passengers (and he swears that this project has nuttin’ to do with the tens of thousands in campaign contributions from those companies who are benefitting from this little train).

    what is always amazing to me is how paltry the campaign donations always are despite the hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars shoveled to these corporate assholes.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/us/politics/28mica.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=mica&st=cse

  57. 57.

    bkny

    June 28, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    via nyt:

    A Congressman’s Pet Project; a Railroad’s BoonBy ERIC LIPTON
    ORLANDO, Fla. — Here in sun-parched Central Florida, workers are ready to break ground this summer for a 61-mile commuter rail project that the federal government ranks as one of the least cost-effective mass transit efforts in the nation.

    With a price tag of $1.2 billion at completion, the rail line is expected to serve just 2,150 commuters a day when it starts operating in three years. It will not link to the Orlando airport or Disney World, among the region’s biggest traffic generators. Florida’s governor is even considering killing the project, worried that local government officials will rebel if they have to cover any shortfalls at the fare box.

    But the so-called SunRail project has survived, at least so far, a testament to the ability of one congressman to help push through hundreds of millions of dollars in federal spending, even at a time of deep concern over ballooning federal deficits.

  58. 58.

    burnspbesq

    June 28, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    @ The Spy Who Loved Me:

    When you own the company, you can pay yourself however much you want and in whatever manner you deem appropriate.

    Not exactly. When you choose to operate in corporate form, you accept all of the consequences, and form matters.

    Also too, a controlling shareholder of a corporation can cause it to pay him or her pretty much whatever he or she wants, but under Section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code only an amount that represents reasonable compensation for services actually rendered to the corporation is deductible in determining the corporation’s taxable income. The excess is a distribution to the shareholder qua shareholder, and if there is E&P, that distribution is a dividend. There is a huge body of case law on this topic.

  59. 59.

    Southern Beale

    June 28, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    @bkny:

    Just got hip to a new tool that actually tracks campaign contributions and legislation. It’s MapLight.org, “Connecting the Dots between Money and Votes.”

  60. 60.

    Omnes Omnibus

    June 28, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    @ The Spy Who Loved Me: If Johnson was a sole proprietor, you would be onto something. Johnson opted for the protections of the corporate form and he must live by the restrictions that are placed upon him.

    ETA: I see burnspbesq got there first. What he said.

  61. 61.

    The Spy Who Loved Me

    June 28, 2011 at 1:02 pm

    @burnspbesq:

    He bought the company in 1997. He says he took no salary from the time he purchased it until he received the deferred compensation in 2010. As the owner/CEO of a company with, apparently, huge annual revenues and a workforce of over 100, would compensation of approximately $769K (10 million divided by 13) be considered unreasonable by the IRS? I find that doubtful.

    As long as he claimed it and paid taxes on it, which is probable, given it’s on his financial disclosure form, I fail to see the problem.

  62. 62.

    Omnes Omnibus

    June 28, 2011 at 1:05 pm

    @ The Spy Who Loved Me: Timing, for one thing.

  63. 63.

    burnspbesq

    June 28, 2011 at 1:08 pm

    @The Spy Who Loved Me:

    He might win, particularly given that he’s in the Seventh Circuit where the Menard’s case is controlling precedent. However, reasonable comp cases are expensive to litigate, because you need experts. Could end up as a Pyrrhic victory.

    I am also constrained to wonder why you think it’s “probable” that he reported it. Almost three decades of practicing tax law leads me to believe that he almost certainly did something to try to shelter it. After all, $10 million minus federal and Wisconsin income tax is substantially less than $9 million, so if he paid tax on the deferred comp he is net out of pocket by approximately $3 million.

  64. 64.

    Han's Solo

    June 28, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    The spy who loved me – Per TPM:

    If Pacur were a publicly traded company, Johnson would have had to recuse himself from all discussions involving his compensation, deferred or otherwise. But because Pacur is a private company, the Federal Election Commission could target him personally.

    “If he’s the officer…he would have personal liability [for cutting the checks to his campaign from the corporate coffers],” Kappel added. “The FEC has historically gone after the officers of the company in these cases. He would be liable not as a candidate, but as a former corporate officer.”

  65. 65.

    Yutsano

    June 28, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    He bought the company in 1997. He says he took no salary from the time he purchased it until he received the deferred compensation in 2010.

    2010 – 1997 = thirteen years. In thirteen years, he NEVER collected a paycheck? Not once? No contributions were made to any sort of retirement nor any health care distributions were paid on his behalf? FOR THIRTEEN YEARS?? Does that sound anywhere near reasonable?

  66. 66.

    Suffern ACE

    June 28, 2011 at 1:14 pm

    Dennis SGMM – Yep and barring some unforseen and unfortunate accident, this is the court we’ll have for quite some time. I can see Scalia hanging on until he’s 90 or leaving when he knows he’ll be replaced by a republican of equal ideology. My guess is the next conservative justice will be a 19 year old.

  67. 67.

    shortstop

    June 28, 2011 at 1:15 pm

    I’ve often heard small businessmen brag about what a wonderful tax dodge owning a business is. You can arrange things so that much of your personal expenses become deductible business expenses – most of vacations can be written off, etc.

    Apparently I have a very conservative accountant, or a very honest one (which has nothing to do with conservatism, when you think about it).

    I think many of those stories are just blowharding bravado. There are really strict limits to what you can write off and the documentation requirements are fairly stiff. Yeah, many people game the system and don’t get caught, but an audit will find them with their financial pants down and they ain’t gonna like the results when the penalties are added to the back taxes.

  68. 68.

    burnspbesq

    June 28, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    @Yutsano:

    I’ve actually seen controlling shareholders of S corporations try to not pay themselves any salary, because their distributive share of the corporation’s income is not subject to FICA (or SE tax, whichever one is applicable). Makes for strange audits, because the normal positions of the parties in reasonable comp cases are reversed.

    But you’re right to wonder what’s going on here. I doubt this guy was living in the back seat of a ’73 Nova and subsisting on Spam and Kraft mac & cheese.

  69. 69.

    Suffern ACE

    June 28, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Yutsano – yeah. I thought the whole “I get a stipend for my food and the company bought my house. And pays for my kids to go to private school as part of the “executive training program” is kind of disallowed as a shelter.

  70. 70.

    shortstop

    June 28, 2011 at 1:19 pm

    2010 – 1997 = thirteen years. In thirteen years, he NEVER collected a paycheck? Not once? No contributions were made to any sort of retirement nor any health care distributions were paid on his behalf? FOR THIRTEEN YEARS?? Does that sound anywhere near reasonable?

    From Bice’s column:

    “Records show the Oshkosh businessman still had income of $1.3 million and $2.3 million annually from 2005 to ’08 from capital gains, corporate earnings and real estate. In the first half of 2010, he received $650,000 in what he called ‘pass-through income’ from a limited liability company that owned Pacur.”

  71. 71.

    Omnes Omnibus

    June 28, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    @ shortstop: I may be cynical here, but, from that same column, it appears that he negotiated an “appropriate” deferred compensation amount with himself. Obviously, this was an arms length transaction (Ha!). This does not pass the smell test for me.

    Editorial parenthetical added.

  72. 72.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    June 28, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    I’m sure there will be a written deferred compensation agreement “produced” shortly. In for a penny, in for a pound.

  73. 73.

    Yutsano

    June 28, 2011 at 1:29 pm

    I’ve actually seen controlling shareholders of S corporations try to not pay themselves any salary, because their distributive share of the corporation’s income is not subject to FICA (or SE tax, whichever one is applicable).

    They do realize if you never pay into FICA you can’t collect on it later, amirite? We get a few of those cases every year when a proud real Merikan suddenly realizes that and liquidates some taxable asset to suddenly pay in. And forgetting the taxes on the asset. Those cases are fun.

    In the first half of 2010, he received $650,000 in what he called ‘pass-through income’ from a limited liability company that owned Pacur

    LB&I revenue officers call those lunch. This could indeed trigger an audit into Johnson’s finances, which might suck for me cause he may just cut the IRS budget for revenge.

  74. 74.

    arguingwithsignposts

    June 28, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    On the larger topic – what is with these fuckers? He’s like Rick Scott in Fla. So fucking brazen.

  75. 75.

    pj

    June 28, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    I called Sen. Johnson’s Oshkosh office.

    Me: Does Sen. Johnson’s office have any statement or explanation on whether there was a written agreement on deferred compensation prior to the campaign?

    Office: He did give a statement.

    Me: You mean the statement he gave to the Journal-Sentinel that he didn’t owe them an explanation?

    Office: Yes. That qualifies as a statement, right?

  76. 76.

    Han's Solo

    June 28, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    I’ve actually seen controlling shareholders of S corporations try to not pay themselves any salary, because their distributive share of the corporation’s income is not subject to FICA (or SE tax, whichever one is applicable).

    Um, that is kind of like the back dated contract issue. Sure, lots of S corporation shareholders do that, but it is still illegal. They should pay self employment tax on there earnings if they own a certain percent of the S Corporation and participate to a certain level. We can get deep in the woods about this if you’d like.

    Now shareholder-employees are a different matter. Shareholder-employees don’t pay SE tax because they take a salary. Of course they try to shift as much of their income from salary to income distribution, but the IRS, should they audit you, can deem that you’ve not been paid a reasonable compensation if you get too aggressive.

    Here is a quick link on the subject:

    http://taxes.about.com/od/scorporations/qt/scorp_payroll.htm

  77. 77.

    Quicksand

    June 28, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    ledger domain legerdemain

    Ooh. (Golf clap.)

  78. 78.

    bill

    June 28, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    @bkny, I’m with you on that. A while ago, I read that some senator or congressman had taken $50,000 in contributions from some corporation and I thought, “That’s all it took?”

    That’s our American politcal class: sleazy and cheap.

  79. 79.

    Emerald

    June 28, 2011 at 3:09 pm

    Dennis SGMM #52

    It’s a truism that those who are present at the occurrence of major historical change often fail to recognize it. In this case, I think that we’ll be able to safely date the end of American democracy to the innovations of the Roberts court.

    Earlier than that. It was in 2000, when the Supremes found it necessary to appoint the losing candidate as President.

    Roberts wouldn’t even be on the court had that not happened. In fact, we’d have decades of liberal justices instead. No Roberts, no Alito. The count would be six to three.

  80. 80.

    dave

    June 28, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    Wonderful, I lose Feingold, Obey, and Hubler and here I am represented by Johnson the corporate criminal, Duffy who can’t make ends meet on $171,000 and at the state level I’ve got Roger “I can afford healthcare I’ve got plenty of money” Rivard, and now Tommy Thompson is going to run for Herb Kohl’s seat and he’ll probably win, folks liked him I don’t know why but they did. Wisconsin, the manure pit of the north.

  81. 81.

    Yutsano

    June 28, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    now Tommy Thompson is going to run for Herb Kohl’s seat

    Then work your tail off for the lesbyterian, because A) she’s awesome and B) you’ll avoid the unpleasantness Thompson will turn himself into to avoid the RINO label.

  82. 82.

    Egypt Steve

    June 28, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    Isn’t this quite close to what Tom Delay got nailed for — basically money laundering? Seems like an enterprising DA or US attorney could go that route, even if the FEC takes a pass.

  83. 83.

    Judas Escargot

    June 28, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    I’ve often heard small businessmen brag about what a wonderful tax dodge owning a business is.

    Me, too. Often immediately followed by complaints about how all their tax money is “going to the sp!cs and n!66erz”.

    It’s cookout season up here. Can’t wait to hear this year’s BS memes.

  84. 84.

    grandpajohn

    June 28, 2011 at 4:54 pm

    Earlier than that. It was in 2000, when the Supremes found it necessary to appoint the losing candidate as President.

    Our country will be haunted,demeaned, and defiled for the next generation as a result of the 2000 theft of the presidency which was ably aided and abetted by the conservatives of the supreme court. men of honor and integrity indeed. May they all rot in Hell.

  85. 85.

    rikryah

    June 28, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    C-R-O-O-K

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Gin & Tonic on War for Ukraine Day 782: If the Opposite of Pro Is Con, Then the Opposite of Progress is a GOP Majority in Congress (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:58pm)
  • Geminid on Take the Fucking Win (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:56pm)
  • Another Scott on War for Ukraine Day 782: If the Opposite of Pro Is Con, Then the Opposite of Progress is a GOP Majority in Congress (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:55pm)
  • sdhays on Monday Evening Open Thread: Another ‘Rich’ Narcissist, Having A Bad Start to His Week (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:54pm)
  • Comrade Bukharin on War for Ukraine Day 782: If the Opposite of Pro Is Con, Then the Opposite of Progress is a GOP Majority in Congress (Apr 15, 2024 @ 9:52pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!