What do the IRS tax records reveal about Donald Trump's reported income and losses?
Executive summary
The IRS tax records made public and reported on by multiple outlets show that Donald Trump and his businesses reported large, chronic losses across decades that were used to offset income and sharply lower federal income tax bills in many years, including paying just $750 in 2016 and 2017 and no federal income tax in 2020; parts of the record also show massive earlier write‑downs, including $1.17 billion in losses in a 1985–1994 span reported by The New York Times [1] [2] [3]. The released returns (2015–2020) and prior leaks together portray a mix of legitimate tax tools—depreciation, business expense deductions and loss carryforwards—and disputed arrangements and audits that critics say merit closer scrutiny [4] [5] [6].
1. What was released and how it reached the public
Six years of Trump’s federal tax returns (2015–2020) were obtained and released by the House Ways and Means Committee after a long legal fight, supplementing earlier media reporting based on leaks and partial documents, including The New York Times’ multi‑year reporting and two pages of a 2005 return; an IRS contractor later pleaded guilty to stealing and leaking many of the records to news organizations [7] [1] [3] [2].
2. The scale and sources of reported losses
The documents show repeated, large business losses across Trump’s portfolio: The New York Times and other reporting documented nearly $1.17 billion in losses in 1985–1994, massive write‑downs at properties such as golf courses (about $315.6 million in golf‑course losses since 2000), and substantial losses at individual businesses and resorts through the 2010s [3] [1]. The returns released for 2015–2020 show more than $58 million in “qualified losses” in 2020 alone when carryforwards were included, and many of Trump’s business entities reported negative qualified business income that year [4] [8].
3. How reported losses translated into reported income and tax paid
The mechanics in the filings are ordinary tax rules—depreciation, business expense deductions and net operating loss carryforwards—that reduce taxable income; the result in the public returns was negative adjusted gross income for the Trumps in four of the six years from 2015–2020 and minimal reported federal income tax in specific years [9] [4]. Media reporting established that Trump paid $750 in federal income taxes in both 2016 and 2017 and no federal income tax in 2020, while other sources note he paid about $38 million on $150 million of income in 2005, illustrating how his effective tax rate has varied widely [2] [10] [11].
4. Red flags, audits and disputed items
The returns and accompanying reporting prompted scrutiny: a prior IRS audit covering 2002–2008 was closed administratively without assessment, and tax lawyers and watchdogs have questioned whether some reported losses and deductions were unusually large or insufficiently substantiated for an ordinary taxpayer—points raised by congressional Democrats and analysts who argued the IRS auditing system and transparency were problematic [3] [6] [8]. The New York Times’ reporting also flagged transactions and deductions that warranted deeper examination, though the Times did not publish all underlying returns it had obtained [1] [3].
5. What the records do not settle and why context matters
The public record covers multiple years but is incomplete: leaked caches, two pages from 2005, and the committee’s 2015–2020 releases provide substantial but not exhaustive coverage, and The New York Times has withheld full original documents to protect sources—meaning some claims about schemes or motives rest on interpretation rather than public audit findings [1] [7] [3]. Expert commentary (e.g., tax writers on PBS and Brookings analyses) notes that the tax code allows many of the techniques visible in the returns, so large losses do not by themselves prove illegality even if they raise fairness and enforcement questions [5] [10].
6. Competing narratives and implicit agendas
Coverage has been shaped by political and institutional agendas: Democrats framed the releases as revelations about tax avoidance and IRS enforcement failures, while Trump and allies argued the filings show lawful use of tax rules and cherry‑pick years to mislead voters; media outlets differ on emphasis between headline figures (like $750 payments) and structural explanations (loss carryforwards and depreciation), and the guilty plea of an IRS contractor who leaked records introduced legal and ethical questions about sourcing [8] [4] [2].