Mediaboss Marketing

By ABDON M. PALLASCH AND LYNN SWEET Staff Reporters March 19, 2012 1:14PM

GOP Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney at University of Chicago as Mitt Romney delivers speech on Economic Freedom Monday, March 19, 2012 . | John H. White~Sun-Times.

storyidforme: 27612659 tmspicid: 9974645 fileheaderid: 4595645

GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney came to the University of Chicago the home of the late legendary conservative economist Milton Friedman to say that Friedman was right: the free market must not be chained.

Milton Friedman knew what President Obama still has not learned, even after three years and hundreds of billions of dollars in spending: The government does not create prosperity; free markets and free people do, Romney told a room full of students and fans.

Exactly two months ago in this same room, President Obamas senior Advisor David Axelrod launched his Institute of Politics that he will chair after he re-elects Obama, he has said. Obama taught law at the University of Chicago.

Romneys main pledges were the Republican staples of lower taxes and less regulation.

Instead of expanding the government, I will shrink it, he said. Instead of raising taxes, Im going to cut them. Instead of adding more regulations, I will reduce them.

He will cut government spending on good and bad programs alike, including Planned Parenthood, he said.

..Subsidies to Planned Parenthood: I an going to eliminate those subsidies and those programs are going to have to stand on their own, Romney said.

Originally posted here:
Mitt Romney in Chicago: ‘Regulations erode our freedom’

(Spencer Green/AP)Seeking to elevate his candidacy back to a general election fight against President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney accused the president of hampering the nation's "economic freedom" and slowing the nation's recovery by proposing tax increases and expanding government bureaucracy.

In a speech at the University of Chicago, where Obama once taught law, Romney insisted the nation's "status" and "standing" are at peril because of the Obama administration's policies.

"The Obama administration's assault on our economic freedom is the principal reason why the recovery has been so tepidwhy it couldn't meet their projections, let alone our expectations," Romney said. "If we don't change course now, this assault on freedom could damage our economy and the well-being of American families for decades to come."

[Related: Romney pulls ahead in Illinois, Santorum to spend primary night in Pennsylvania]

The speech, delivered just one day before Illinois' Republican presidential primary, made no direct mention of Rick Santorum, Romney's chief rival for the GOP nomination. But Romney used the moment to double down on his argument that he's the best-equipped candidate in the race to defeat Obama and lead the nation's economic recovery.

The former Massachusetts governor accused the Obama administration of standing in the way of Americans who are trying to build their businesses. He suggested that "pioneers" like Thomas Edison, the Wright Brothers, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs would have found it "much more difficult, if not impossible" to carry out their dreams under regulations enacted by the Obama administration and Congress.

'Some of America's greatest success stories are of people who started out with nothing but a good idea and a corner in their garage," said Romney. "Too often today, Americans look at what it takes to start a business and they don't see promise and opportunity. They see government standing in their way. The real cost isn't just the taxes paid and money spent complying with the rules. It's the businesses that are never started, the ideas that are never pursued, the dreams that are deferred."

In a question and answer session after his speech, Romney repeated a statement that he's made several times recentlyinsisting that he doesn't understand how young people could vote for a Democrat for president. Among other things, he attacked Obama and Congress for not proposing any concrete measures to make Social Security solvent for future generations.

"You may not like my ideas, but at least I put ideas out there," Romney said.

More popular Yahoo! News stories:

More:
Mitt Romney accuses President Obama of blocking ‘economic freedom’

By Kate Hessling Assistant News Editor

UPPER THUMB When it comes to determining how wind turbines should be taxed, the State Tax Commission showed its hand when it took action last fall that would significantly lower values. Now, local governments in a statewide coalition have shown their hand.

The coalition has obtained a legal opinion and information to support the position that the state commissions ruling does not accurately reflect the true cash value of wind turbines.

Which hand will sway the ultimate decision of how turbines will be valued? Thats up to the local board of reviews and assessors.

The board is governed by the state Constitution, which requires it to work by fact when evaluating the taxable value of a property.

This is something thats been in Michigan law for a very long time, he said. They have to weigh the facts that they have and make a determination of what the value is.

The State Tax Commission is responsible for providing a format to help assessors determine the true cash value to be placed on a property. But, assessors and boards of review can consider other facts when determining true cash values, Schlichting said.

In fact, both assessors and boards of review have the legal authority and obligation to deviate from the use of the State Tax Commissions wind turbine assessment information if it determines the commissions findings do not reflect true cash value for the turbines being assessed, according to the coalitions legal opinion.

In making its changes last fall, the State Tax Commission determined the value of a one- to two-year-old turbine is much lower than previously considered. In determining the value, the commission ignored the income approach to valuating turbines because they are classified as personal property, according to a response to a Freedom of Information Act request that State Tax Commission Chairman Douglas B. Roberts sent the Michigan Township Association. The Michigan Township Association is part of the statewide coalition of local government officials from Huron, Tuscola, Sanilac, Gratiot and Mason counties.

The coalition had been working on obtaining the data the State Tax Commission used last fall when it made the changes that would lower the taxable value of wind turbines. An initial response to a FOIA request seeking a copy of that research that led to the change stated that no documentation exists with the Michigan Department of Treasury. In the response to a subsequent FOIA request, Douglas writes, the basis for change was common sense, because the commission could not find any sales studies for used wind turbines. Therefore, it couldnt use the usual selling price to define the true cash value of used wind turbines.

Read the original post:
Wind turbines: What are theyworth at tax time?

Queensland mining magnate Clive Palmer has indicated there will be a High Court challenge against the carbon tax because he has advice the legislation is unconstitutional.

The legislation has passed both houses of Parliament and is due to come into effect in the middle of the year.

The Coalition has promised to repeal the legislation if it wins the next election.

Mr Palmer, who is a financial backer of the Coalition, first threatened to challenge the legislation last year and now says he is going to act on it.

"Our advice is that the carbon tax in its current form is unconstitutional, and that's recognised in the legislation itself when it says if it's found to be unconstitutional," he told the ABC's 7.30.

"Now, I think the constitution of Australia's much more important than having a number of lawyers or Parliament trying to slip around it.

"The constitution sets out how it should be changed, how the states should vote - the majority of Australians have a democratic right to vote." When asked on precisely what grounds the tax is unconstitutional, Mr Palmer said: "I can only go on the advice that I'm given, and so we'll be looking forward to the challenge." Mr Palmer says the legal action will be brought on by the companies he owns.

"The companies I own - who are large corporations - have got the rights to go to the High Court, that's what it's set up to do," he said.

"That's the country we live in - freedom of speech.

"We've all got the right to say what we think.

Read this article:
Palmer to challenge carbon tax in High Court

Eleven posts at Hammersmith and Fulham Council, in west London, were filled in this way, including Nick Johnson, the chief executive of its housing arm, whose company was paid more than 900,000 over a four-year period.

The council was so concerned about Mr Johnsons payment arrangement that it commissioned a report by the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers on whether it risked facing a bill for unpaid tax.

The report said: Normally the position of chief executive is considered to be an office holder.

"On that basis there would be a medium-to-high risk that there was a PAYE obligation on Hammersmith and Fulham Homes Ltd."

Craven District Council, North Yorks, paid eight staff through limited companies, while St Edmundsbury Borough Council, Suffolk, and Ashfield District Council, Notts, each had five.

Several councils admitted paying staff through external companies but were unable to provide figures, while others were unsure.

Some officials may be paying PAYE through their limited companies but the arrangements mean they have the option to pay themselves via dividends, which are taxed at a lower rate.

They also potentially allow them to pay less in national insurance contributions.

Mrs Hodge said her committee would pursue the issue, adding: This is a tax avoidance scheme which is totally wrong.

"When you are a public servant it's not right you should be paid in a way that avoids tax.

Read this article:
Dozens of council staff paid through limited companies to 'avoid tax'