Sometimes an extension is just an extension

I posted a Chris Cillizza column yesterday suggesting that Mitt Romney had filed for an extension on his taxes this year so that he could decide when it would be most politically helpful to release them. The idea was convincing to me -- but not to Jeff Skelton, a reader from San Francisco who knows a thing or two about the financial services industry, and pushed back like so:

You're way off the mark on Romney's tax-filing delay ... Many, MANY, private partnerships have trouble getting investors' K-1s (the partnership's version of a W-2) out by April 15th. Romney has a number such investments. For him to file before having all his information would be stupid. Can you imagine the headlines: "Romney Amends Tax Return! Rich Guy Can't Get It Right the First Time!"

The political context for Romney's decision can't be ignored: filing for an extension may be standard practice for a lot of people with investment-based income, but then most people with investment-based income aren't running for president and facing pressure to release their tax returns. And when his campaign announced Romney was requesting an extension, they also didn't do anything to narrow the time frame in which he might release his full tax return -- only saying that he'd do so in the next six months, which gives Romney maximum flexibility going forward. But Romney is also operating within the limits of a financial and tax-collection system that leaves him with only so many options for getting this right.