Sen. Chuck Grassley: 'I'd be very concerned' about how President Donald Trump's tax returns got out
Ian RichardsonSen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said Wednesday he's concerned how the New York Times obtained access to President Donald Trump's tax information, citing a law meant to keep tax information confidential.
"That information should have never gotten out, and whoever got it out violated the law," Grassley, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, said on a conference call with Iowa reporters.
The New York Times in a report published Sunday night said its reporters had obtained and analyzed tax return data for Trump and his businesses over more than two decades. The Times is in the process of releasing additional reporting, which so far have shown Trump sustained large financial losses over his career and has had small federal tax bills.
Trump has long refused to release his tax returns, saying it's because he's under audit. He has dismissed the Times' articles as "fake news" but hasn't agreed to release his returns to refute the reporting.
Grassley on Wednesday pointed to section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code — which governs the confidentiality and disclosure of tax returns and return information by the Internal Revenue Service — saying he would be concerned about how the information became sent to the Times.
Asked about the substance of the Times' reporting, Grassley said he doesn't have enough evidence. The senator pointed to Trump's statements that he has paid "millions of dollars" in income taxes, rather than the $750 per year in 2016 and 2017 reported by the Times.
"All I've got is the president saying he's paid millions of dollars in taxes, and you've got the New York Times printing what they think, and we don't have the facts to make a judgment," Grassley said. "But let me say that I'd be very concerned about how it got out."
Grassley said earlier in the week that he's also concerned about why it has taken the Internal Revenue Service so long to complete its audit of Trump's taxes. He said Wednesday he's confident the IRS "will eventually get its job done."
"If you owe taxes, you're going to pay those taxes," he said. "Because there's nothing more certain — as you've heard many times — in this world than death and taxes."
The Times has not released the tax documents themselves. Executive editor Dean Baquet said in an editor's note that the Times is not publishing the documents because it does not want to jeopardize its sources.
Baquet also wrote that the Supreme Court "has repeatedly ruled that the First Amendment allows the press to publish newsworthy information that was legally obtained by reporters even when those in power fight to keep it hidden.”
Trump's tax returns:5 key takeaways from experts
Grassley: Supreme Court unlikely to strike down Affordable Care Act with or without new justice
Grassley on Wednesday said he had met Tuesday with Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Trump's nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Grassley said Barrett has a reputation for her "commitment to apply the law as written regardless of outcome," and that he plans to evaluate her nomination based on her merits.
He said he doesn't believe Barrett stands to be the tipping point for an upcoming Supreme Court challenge to Affordable Care Act, which is set for oral arguments a week after Election Day.
"I doubt that it's going to be struck down whether she's on the court or not," he said of the health-care law, also known as Obamacare.
The challenge, from a group of 18 states led by Texas, came after the Republican-led Congress passed its tax cut in 2017, eliminating the ACA's tax on those refusing to buy insurance. During Tuesday's debate, former Vice President Joe Biden raised the concern that Trump's new appointee could become the deciding vote in the challenge against the law.
But Grassley said "even a strict constructionist" like Barrett would likely try to save as much of a law as they can, so he doubts the entire law is in jeopardy. Many health care law analysts have also said that it's unlikely the entire law would be thrown out by the court.
"Of course, this is all speculation," Grassley said.
On presidential debate: 'I think the loser of the debate was Chris Wallace'
Weighing in on Tuesday night's raucous presidential debate, Grassley said he found it unfortunate that it included so much of the candidates speaking at the same time.
"Both candidates were talking over each other, and I wish that hadn’t have happened," he said. "I think the loser of the debate was (moderator) Chris Wallace."
Grassley said he believed the president did well but could have been stronger in ways, such as putting more emphasis on his vision for a second term.
Regarding Trump's response to Wallace's question of whether he would denounce white supremacists, specifically the extremist group the Proud Boys, Grassley declined to say whether he thought Trump had gone far enough with his response. Trump sidestepped the call to condemn white supremacists outright on Tuesday, telling the group to "stand back and stand by."
"Of course white supremacy is wrong, and I believe that President Trump believes that, as well," Grassley said. "He should have — well, I guess I’ll leave it at that."
Ian Richardson covers the Iowa Statehouse for the Des Moines Register. Reach him at irichardson@registermedia.com, at 515-284-8254, or on Twitter at @DMRIanR.
Your subscription makes work like this possible. Subscribe today at DesMoinesRegister.com/Deal.