They really just can't get over the 2016 election, can they?

They are never, ever, going to get over the 2016 election. Ever. From September of that year. https://t.co/EN87uO1J0E pic.twitter.com/My4Z3XZXoi

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) May 11, 2024

The New York Times has resurrected a tax case involving former President Donald Trump that dates back to seven years before he announced his run for President. The debate revolves around a property the former President bought in Chicago in 2008:

Former President Donald J. Trump used a dubious accounting maneuver to claim improper tax breaks from his troubled Chicago tower, according to an Internal Revenue Service inquiry uncovered by The New York Times and ProPublica. Losing a yearslong audit battle over the claim could mean a tax bill of more than $100 million.

The 92-story, glass-sheathed skyscraper along the Chicago River is the tallest and, at least for now, the last major construction project by Mr. Trump. Through a combination of cost overruns and the bad luck of opening in the teeth of the Great Recession, it was also a vast money loser.

But when Mr. Trump sought to reap tax benefits from his losses, the I.R.S. has argued, he went too far and in effect wrote off the same losses twice.

The New York Times uses the issue to launch into a long summary of the former President's use of the tax code, and criticizes, again, his refusal to release his tax returns, which are not a requirement to run for President. This seems an awful lot like the current legacy media tactic of throwing everything against the Trump wall to see if anything will stick. The President's son, Eric Trump, responded to the Times' request for comment:

In response to questions for this article, Mr. Trump’s son Eric, executive vice president of the Trump Organization, said: “This matter was settled years ago, only to be brought back to life once my father ran for office. We are confident in our position, which is supported by opinion letters from various tax experts, including the former general counsel of the I.R.S.”

The Times admitted that this issue is likely a nothingburger, writing:

It is unclear how the audit battle has progressed since December 2022, when it was mentioned in the congressional report. Audits often drag on for years, and taxpayers have a right to appeal the I.R.S.’s conclusions. The case would typically become public only if Mr. Trump chose to challenge a ruling in court.

"Unclear," in this case, translates as "we have no way of knowing."

See Related: DENIED: Trump Team's Second Request for Mistrial Shot Down in Manhattan Case 

Trump Strikes Back, Rips 'Disgraceful' Hush Money Trial and 'Corrupt' Judge

But the Times unwittingly made one excellent point in this piece. Here's the onion:

The agency’s difficulty in keeping up with Mr. Trump’s maneuvers, experts said, showed that this gray area of tax law was too easy to exploit.

“Congress needs to radically change the rules for the worthlessness deduction,” Professor Schwidetzky said.

The first layer here is the "gray area of tax law." The current United States tax code consists of over a million words of laws, regulations, and case law. By comparison, "War and Peace" is slightly over half a million words. American tax law is a virtual sea of gray areas, and to know that I need look no further than to my wife, who has a Master's in Accounting and who has done our taxes for decades, with both of us self-employed; she knows the tax code pretty well, and she will testify that it is a sea of contradictions, gray areas, and downright nonsense. And she only does our taxes. A tax attorney or accountant could probably describe thousands of such gray areas.

The second layer here is the New York Times attempting a smear piece when there is no evidence that the former President (or his tax accountants and attorneys) did nothing more but find one of those gray areas in the law and take advantage of it, which everybody, every individual, every small business, every corporation does at every opportunity. Nobody, not even the most strident advocates of raising marginal tax rates, pays one penny more than they can get away with. Donald Trump and his organization are no different. Every corporation in the history of the republic that has real estate holdings would take advantage of any gray area like this.

The Times is pointing a finger at Trump here in this nothingburger of a piece that describes a case originating 16 years in the past, of which the publication admits the current status is "unclear." This is electioneering, not reporting. If their concern really was dealing with these kinds of loopholes and gray areas, they would be campaigning for scrapping the entire labyrinthian tax code and replacing it with something simple and intuitive - like a flat tax.

Congress doesn't just need to radically change the rules for the worthlessness deduction. They need to radically change the nation's entire method of raising revenue.