Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Who, me? who wrote (7184)	9/27/1998 9:08:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Payroll records for Future Tech show that on Sept. 8, 1995, Haycox and six other employees received $1,000 bonuses. Five days later, the employees each gave the Clinton/Gore campaign a $1,000 donation, Federal Election Commission records show. Hmmm. The IRS will be interested to know if Federal Income tax, Social Security tax, and Medicare tax was properly withheld from those bonuses. Under Internal Revenue Code, all cash payments are gross wages, and the previously mentioned taxes must be withheld from every check or cash that an employee gets. If it was done properly, then the gross bonus would have had to been closer to $1,300, and the employer would have had to match the Social Security and Medicare withheld, in the form of Employer Payroll Tax. So there is no way possible for that "Future Tech" company to have made the deal with the employees without it costing the company at least 7.65% of Gross Wages, unless the employees wages already were higher than the ceiling of taxable wages for Social Security purposes. But since there is no ceiling on Medicare Employer Payroll tax, the transaction would have cost the company a minimum of 1.45% of Gross Wages paid with the bonuses, plus the amount of Federal Income tax withheld, at a minimum rate of 15%. My guess is that the company may have not done the bonuses properly. I would think that the IRS might be suspicious also.

To: Who, me? who wrote (7184)	9/28/1998 7:16:00 AM
From: Sam Ferguson	Respond to of 13994

This type forced donation-reimbursement is widespread in all campaigns of all parties and should be stopped. Neither party is willing to stop it. Janet Reno is aware of this and knows she cannot investigate every one and refuses to be the goat of politics. Fred Thompson who headed the senate investigation is guilty of accepting millions in campaign money knowing much of it was this same type event. He is a lawyer and knows rotten politics better than most. Term limits and common cause seem to be the only chance to slow it down. It has to stopped at the grass roots community not the DC "ins."