Time Magazine's January 23rd cover story, "Warren Buffett Is on a Radical Track" spends 5000 words dicussing Warren Buffett's nontraditional views on how the wealthy should pay their "fair share" BUT doesn't ONCE mention that his own company, Berkshire Hathaway has has been fighting the IRS over a billion dollars (give or take) since 2002.
This alone doesn't necessarily invalidate ANY of Buffett's views on taxation. BUT, in the context of the article (again, 5000 words), it has to be worth at least one fucking footnote.
The Time piece references material from the Bershire Hathaway 2010 Annual Report. Here's a statement from page 54 of that report:
"At December 31, 2010 and 2009, net unrecognized tax benefits were $1,005 million and $926 million, respectively. Included in the balance at December 31, 2010, are $774 million of tax positions that, if recognized, would impact the effective tax rate."
An "unrecognized tax benefit" is the difference between the numbers that a company submits on its tax return for a given time period and what it thinks it will actually end up owing after negotiating with the government. So, one could argue that Buffet, if he really means what he says, should tell his accountants to just pay the damn money and save the IRS a lot of fuss and bother.
But that might be too radical.