Congress: Make Trump's tax returns public. After Trump's praise for Putin, Americans deserve to see his tax returns immediately

After the shocking spectacle of Trump siding with Putin over U.S. intelligence about Russian influence in America's election, Congress should have no choice but to force Trump to finally release his taxes.

Petition to Congress: “Trump's praise for Vladimir Putin makes it even more urgent that Americans understand the scope of Trump's financial dealings. Make Trump's tax returns public by passing the Presidential Tax Transparency Act or using existing subpoena power.”

Trump has broken with decades of precedent and refused to release his tax returns. So Americans have little idea who his business partners have been, how much money foreign entities are paying him even as he occupies the White House – or how indebted he may be to Russian interests.1 Think about this for a second: Vladimir Putin may know more about Donald Trump's business dealings than the American public. Tell Congress: Make Trump's tax returns public. Sign petition. Even some Republicans are demanding to see Trump's tax returns after his disturbing performance in Helsinki, where he sided with Putin and praised the brutal autocrat.2 Sen. John McCain declared it “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory,” and conservative Rep. Mark Sanford admitted he does not know if Putin has damaging information on Donald Trump.3,4 Without a look at his tax returns, the American public cannot know whether Trump’s current debt or his previous business partnerships obligate him financially to Russian oligarchs aligned with Vladimir Putin. Trump’s debt load increased from $350 to $630 million in 2016, when American banks were reluctant to extend Trump credit.5 In 2008, Trump’s son is claimed to have said, “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”6 What's more, a government watchdog filed a lawsuit just days after the inauguration claiming that Trump is in violation of the Constitution because any payments to Trump from foreign entities violates the anti-bribery “emoluments” clause of the Constitution.7 It appears clear that Trump is using his position to enrich himself and his family, but without his tax returns, Americans are left wondering if Putin has dirt on the man occupying the White House. Tell Congress: Make Trump's tax returns public. Click here. Congress has multiple options to give the American people access to Trump's tax returns. Chief among them is Sen. Ron Wyden’s Presidential Tax Transparency Act, which would require candidates to release their last three years of tax returns within 15 days of being nominated, or the Federal Election Commission would do it for them.8 Key committees may also have the power to subpoena and release Trump's tax returns to the public. The American people deserve the truth about Donald Trump's businesses and to whom he owes money. If Trump has something to hide, it raises the possibility of intentional Russian blackmail. If not, there's no reason for his tax returns not to be public. Tell Congress: Make Trump's tax returns public. Sign the petition: https://act.credoaction.com/sign/helsinki_trump_taxes?t=8&akid=29411%2E3130208%2Egbj_8p Heidi Hess, CREDO Action Add your name: References: Avery Anapol, "GOP lawmaker renews call for Trump to release tax returns after Putin summit," The Hill, July 17, 2018. Ibid. Ibid. Sarah Hallam, "John McCain: Trump gave 'one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory,'" CNN, July 16, 2018. Josh Marshall, "Trump & Putin. Yes, It's Really a Thing," Talking Points Memo, July 23, 2016. Tom Hamburger, Rosalind S. Helderman and Michael Birnbaum, "Inside Trump’s financial ties to Russia and his unusual flattery of Vladimir Putin," The Washington Post, June 17, 2016. Kim Bellware, "President Trump Has Already Violated The Constitution, Lawsuit Claims," HuffPost, Jan. 23, 2017. Amber Phillips, "Want your presidential candidates to release their taxes? There’s a bill for that." The Washington Post, Oct. 3, 2016.

Prevent election interference: Insist that online campaign ads contain disclaimers on who is paying for them

The comment to the Federal Election Commission reads:

"Don’t let Putin and his allies interfere in American elections again. Require online campaign ads to include disclaimers as to who is paying for them – just like what is done for television and print advertisements. Americans deserve transparent information about who is paying for communication with a goal of influencing their votes."



By now, there is no doubt that the Russian sources used Facebook and social media platforms to interfere with the 2016 election – even using Russian rubles to pay for ads they designed to turn out Donald Trump supporters.4 We are only beginning to learn the full extent of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Last month, Facebook revealed that more than $100,000 in ads were purchased by a Kremlin-linked Russian company in order to influence voters’ opinions and during recent hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Facebook revealed that these duplicitous ads may have reached as many as 126 million Americans.1,2,3

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is currently taking public comments on whether it should change the rules governing online ad disclosures so that consumers can easily identify who pays for political ads on the internet. CREDO is joining with our friends at Daily Kos, DemandProgress, Public Citizen and many other progressive partners to collect as many comments as possible before the Nov. 9 deadline in support of these important disclosures.

Tell the FEC to require online campaign ads to include disclaimers as to who is paying for them – just like what is done for television and print advertisements. Click here to submit a comment.

Changes in digital communications have far outpaced regulations. While only 18 percent of Americans cited the internet as their primary news source in the 2004 election, 65 percent of Americans identified the internet as their leading source of information in 2016.5,6 The FEC has required television and radio ads to include disclosures for decades, but its transparency rules are extremely outdated – the agency still has rules related to telegrams and typewriters while allowing online platform to run wild.7

Facebook has long benefited from the lack of disclosure regulations. In 2010, the company argued along with Google to the FEC that ads with character limits should be exempt from disclosure rules. A year later in 2011, Facebook even went so far as to challenge the FEC’s 3-3 decision that ads must at least link to a webpage with a disclaimer by deciding to move forward with the assumption that the law would not be enforced because the commission was split.8

Since its founding, Facebook advertisers have been able to operate in secrecy – with no required disclosures regarding who pays for electoral ads. The company has only come under scrutiny in the aftermath of the 2016 election since special counsel Robert Mueller obtained a search warrant for Facebook ads in connection to Trump's Russia ties.9 In response Facebook, along with Twitter, announced new voluntarily rules for campaign disclosures, but we cannot rely on these companies’ effort to regulate themselves when it comes to electoral transparency.

The FEC is accepting public comment only until Nov 9.10 Now is the time for us to speak out and demand transparency in online ads. Whether it’s foreign influence or corporate interests, we have a right to know who is paying for ads to sway voters.

Tell the FEC to require online campaign ads to include disclaimers as to who is paying for them. Click the link below to leave your comment:

https://act.credoaction.com/sign/FEC_comment?t=7&akid=25830%2E3130208%2EozgoQL

- Kaili Lambe, CREDO Action from Working Assets



References:

Scott Shane and Vindu Goel, “Fake Russian Facebook Accounts Bought $100,000 in Political Ads,” The New York Times, Sept. 6, 2017.

Craig Timberg, Elizabeth Dwoskin, Adam Entous and Karoun Demirjian, "Russian ads, now publicly released, show sophistication of influence campaign," The Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2017.

Dylan Byers, "Facebook estimates 126 million people were served content from Russia-linked pages," CNN, Oct. 31, 2017.

Timberg, et al.,"Russian ads, now publicly released, show sophistication of influence campaign."

Pew Research Center, “The internet and the 2004 election,” March 6, 2005.

Amy Mitchell, Jeffrey Gottfried, Michael Barthel, and Elisa Shearer, “Pathways to news,” Pew Research Center, July 7, 2016.

April Glaser, “Should Political Ads on Facebook Include Disclaimers?” Slate, Oct. 17, 2017

Ibid.

Kerry Flynn, “Facebook to hand more than 3,000 Russian ads to Congress,” Mashable, Sept. 21, 2017.

Ali Breland, “Facebook, Twitter, Google invited to testify on Russian election meddling,” The Hill, Oct. 6, 2017.