Slashdot Mirror
Senators To Unveil the 'Ex-Patriot Act' To Respond To Facebook's Saverin
An anonymous reader writes "Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has a status update for Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin: Stop attempting to dodge your taxes by renouncing your U.S. citizenship or never come to back to the U.S. again." See this earlier story on Saverin's plan to make the leap out of the U.S. tax system.
A) More government/laws
B) More Taxes
C) More War
D) All of the above
Why target only those evade their taxes by renouncing their citizenship? Shouldn't these politicians take a good look at themselves? How many of them use every loophole (or sneaky, illegal tactic) they can find to evade their taxes? These people are not above reproach. Most, if not all, are just as guilty of evading their taxes.
Like the Soviet Union where you can't leave?
Or like Nazi Germany, where you can leave, but not bring any of your valuables?
The move was likely a financial one, as he owns an estimated 4 percent of Facebook and stands to make $4 billion when the company goes public. ...
Saverin’s move, which they dub a “scheme” that would “help him duck up to $67 million in taxes.”
You're telling me he only has to pay 1.6% on $4 billion? Goddamn the rich have it good.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
was kind of hoping this was to cancel out the patriot act...
Many athletes from other countries with very high tax rates (Sweden for example) would become naturalized US citizens because the US was well known for having tons of tax loop holes for the wealthy.Now that those loop holes are closing, the flow of greedy rich people of flowing the other way. It's really not a big deal now that globalization has devalued citizenship for the most part.
D
The first, last, and only tech news site on the net
The nerve of Saverin to think that it was actually his money! What was he thinking?.
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Great. First we have the McCarthyist Enemy Expatration Act and now the Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy. Two really different things, the first being far more egregious than the latter. This is how you get clueless people to think they are supporting something good when all they can remember is "that expatriation bill".
Senators to drastically simplify the tax system and eliminate loopholes?
Instead, these two people are going to overreact to the publicity received by this particular individual and create a bill to address him and the people like him (I believe under a couple thousand people over the last few years). It will do little to impact the nation as a whole.
Imagine if they were to put their effort into fixing the root of the problem...
Doesn't solve the problem of unfair taxation, and makes a bad problem worse. Why are we still voting for these idiots again?
This signature intentionally left blank.
With asshats like Chuck Schumer in office, what makes him think Saverin (and many others) *want* to come back? It's a little like a hotel manager banning you from his hotel after you complain about the fact that someone took a crap on the room's bed.
Capital gains are already due when you renounce your citizenship. Placing the burden of proof on someone to prove they aren't renouncing for tax purposes is ridiculous, and possibly unconstitutional. Why would I need a "valid" reason to renounce my citizenship? And adding a clause to bar the person from reentry for life is just petty. Blaming people for leaving when we have laws and policies they disagree with is pointing the finger in the wrong direction. Either we don't want those people here anyway, or else we're the problem.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
The senators are just angry because they didn't get their cut of the action.
Expatriates from every country have family, friends, and historical ties to the country they came from. Denying visitation for that reason is morally wrong. Moreover I'm universally opposed to bills of attainder and ex-post-facto laws. They were stupid and contemptible back during the ACORN stupidity, and they're still an unreasonable abuse of legislative power now. If this act applies in any way to Saverin, it would be an undermining of the rule of law.
Why are your senators always so mad?
It makes them look busy.
Doing it as an individual is novel. However, it is a very common case for companies to do this - take all the benefits of incorporating in one place, then set up shell corporations to book all your profits elsewhere wherever taxes (and services, but it doesn't matter) are minimal. But then when somebody infringes their rights, they come crying to the powerful government where they incorporated (which actually has expensive stuff like courts and diplomats and armies to impose a global Intellectual Property regime... It's especially common among high-tech companies.) So if you include that, it is actually a large issue.
I'm not too comfortable with this particular law for some reason. I think I'd rather see nations work together to close the inter-government loopholes in corporate taxes instead.
Wait, what? If marginal and capital gains tax rates keep falling, more people will leave the US for lower taxes? How does that work exactly?
This is America... the big melting pot and all that... names are the last thing that tell you where people are from here. I live in the area that Schumer (unfortunately) represents. We have hispanics with Polish names, Russians with English names and blacks with Irish names... and most of them are at least third generation Americans.
The legislature should not be trying to build "walls" to keep people from leaving, but should rather work on making the USA a desirable place to live. If a few rich people expatriate, it's not the end of the world. I think bitter politicians like these Dem senators give the USA a bad image.
It's funny that Schumer, who campaigned AGAINST closing tax loopholes for "investment managers" in 2007 now is snarking against this guy for a similar dodge. Guess he didn't send a big enough check to Schumer's office before announcing his plan.
Burn the land and boil the sea........
Why would he bother to come back? There are plenty of decent places to live in the world, especially when you have money.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I think they're pissed off because it's the most uncomplicated way (and fully legal) of avoiding taxes. You don't even need to hire expensive lawyers or anything, like many of them senators probably have, in order to evade taxes. It's ENVY!
As a nation of immigrants, I sometimes wish say China or another major country would try to pull the same thing with their citizens who have emigrated to the U.S. We would hear all kinds of politicians going high and right about human rights and violations of national sovereignty, etc.
One could argue that what FaceBook co-founder Eduardo Saverin did was unethical, but despite all of that, the right to emigrate and ex-patriate is a basic human right that is enshrined in U.S. and in international law. Punishing individuals who exercise a basic human right is by definition tyranny.
"Ex-PATRIOT” – “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy”
Holy smokes! I needed to catch my breath after saying that...
A simple tax code, without flexibility in interpretation (which means that IRS just says "no you can't do that" even though there isn't any specific justification in the code), means giant loopholes and tax evasion in practice.
A substantial fraction of the tax code is the way it is because they are patches done to attempt to preclude diversions of income which were not intended by the simple code.
All sorts of very simple appearing programs in fact have egregious security bugs in the corner cases.
Who puts Saverin's house out when it is burning out of control?
Who paves the roads and repairs the bridges that Saverin's luxury cars utilize every day?
Who delivers the mail that Saverin relies on for his business and home operations?
Who manages the pipes and treatment of the shit that Saverin dumps down his toilets every day?
Who patrols the streets that Saverin lives and works on, protecting him from crime?
Who watches and protects the nation of America when terrorists and other countries seek to destroy Saverin's way of life, property, and business interests?
In Saverin's mind (and yours) all of these are freebies.. entitlements. No responsibility to maintain them whatsoever.
People like Saverin are half of what's wrong with America today. I will be glad when we are one less "Saverin citizen" when he departs for Singapore. We don't need trash like that here.
That someone is successfully abusing the system better than they are.
Would the damn Senate please GTFO of meddling in individual cases, please? Terry Schiavo, Eduardo Saverin? Dear useless fucking politicans, please address the problems of the HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of citizens first. And if you must legislate over 1 "person", do so for the fucking "corporations are people too my friend".
Not that I sympathize with this slimy tax-dodger, but I hope he gets away with it.
The value of his demonstration on how the rich view the world is worth more to the world (and the American public) than the taxes he owes. I don't want that demonstration stopped.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
don't we have much bigger things to worry about? This isn't a common case....well, it might be if things continue the way they are going.
From the article, "Last year 1,700 people renounced their U.S. citizenship." YES, for a nation of only 313 million, 1,700 people renouncing their citizenship in a single year is a major problem. I for one am glad our Senate is on it.
I don't see why we should ever approve visas to any naturalized citizen who renounces their citizenship.
I don't care about the tax reasons, that's a red herring as far as I'm concerned.
As far as I know, it was US policy in the past to refuse visas to ex-citizens, it's a good policy and we should continue to have it.
It is not a right for foreign nationals to visit the US, and visiting can be regulated with almost no restriction (I can't think of any limitations, maybe for diplomats)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
This was done by the USSR, Jews wanted to leave for Israel? Not before you settled your debt which strangely non-jews just didn't seem to have.
Mind you, another version of it could be extremely radical. Any refugee from a country who goes back to that country on holiday, can stay there... instant end to economic refugee's.
This plan makes sense if you truly believe in the free market and capitalism. It is basically just one hotel saying that if you pay in another hotel, you can't sleep in their rooms. But who believes in the free market and capitalism anymore.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
It's *NOT* novel, and as I pointed out in the last article's comments page, there's already law on the books that you're liable for 10 years of federal taxes when you expatriate. So in fact, you're already on the hook even if you leave, they just may have been lax in enforcing this before.
Why are your senators always so mad?
Because this means less money for them to spend.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
Exactly. All the massive companies have their main corporate body elsewhere in a tax havens, and you get bet the main shareholder have their wealth set up in a similar manner.
Perhaps the politicians would be better off serving the public and not setting up laws to facilitate the above for a quick back-hand in their own self interest.
Because he didn't make any of that money based on Government-subsidized infrastructure, did he? Like, for example, the protocols and research necessary to create the Internet?
All valid points. However, I am a little bewildered as to why you have stood idly by whilst China conducts massive commerce over the same infrastructure with money actually leaving the USA and no sales tax being paid on those transactions to the American government. Where is your outrage there? Not only is that like a truck drive avoiding paying for roads, it's like a truck driver driving your money away on those same roads. Why is this not outrageous?
This is like someone making shedloads of money with a trucking company, and then doing everything possible to not pay for roads.
Look, my initial reaction to this story is identical to yours. I see this guy go to Harvard, reap the benefits of being in a safe country with tax dollars that create the ecosystem for something like Facebook to flourish and then when it comes to his turn to put back into the system, he kites off. Well, the story isn't that simple, he was born in Sao Paulo and probably is one of the people the US has brain drained from India, Brazil, etc in order to bolster our own economy. On top of that, Facebook is a global phenomena by now with serious activity world-wide. So, you know, I don't feel so bad that now Singapore or where ever he takes up residence has "reverse brain drained" the US in this instance due to "steep" taxes. I'd be more upset if Zuckerberg did it but in the end, this single IPO is probably trivial compared to every company maneuvering "sales" to Ireland and the Netherlands to avoid paying billions of dollars to the United States each year. This is a one time thing and I think the "Ex-Patriot Act" is garbage when they should be targeting the systematic avoidance done by almost every company that can claim international sales. Poor poor Eduardo, he was just being an efficient little Capitalist.
With corporate person-hood becoming a major problem, will the "Ex-Patriot Act" apply to these tax evasion strategies of which everyone is guilty?
My work here is dung.
It's not entirely to avoid taxes - he'll pay those regardless. It's to make it easier to do business in other countries. There have been a few articles on ex-pats, and the legal hoops through which people and foreign banks, in particular, have to jump is ridiculous, if not downright onerous. Some foreign banks have simply refused to do business with Americans because of these stupid regs. It's as if the good ol' US of A owns your ass, even if you're not in this country, or making money, here.
Schumer - my senator, unfortunately - is just grandstanding, once again, the pissbag...
Gee, corrupt Democrat bully Chuck Schumer threatens someone. And now slashdot helps him get more of the publicity for which he is so obviously whoring.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Isn't that why many companies are based in Delaware, but actually use that court district in East Texas to file IP suits?
I think I read once how there is some office building in DE that on paper houses like 200 different companies. Each suite is only like 100 sq ft so it can support a ton of companies to each have their own address, even though they are never used.
From 8 USC 1182 - INADMISSIBLE ALIENS:
(E) Former citizens who renounced citizenship to avoid taxation
Any alien who is a former citizen of the United States who officially renounces United States citizenship and who is determined by the Attorney General to have renounced United States citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxation by the United States is inadmissible.
So, what's the point of the "new" proposed law besides political grandstanding?
Why target only those evade their taxes by renouncing their citizenship? Shouldn't these politicians take a good look at themselves? How many of them use every loophole (or sneaky, illegal tactic) they can find to evade their taxes? These people are not above reproach. Most, if not all, are just as guilty of evading their taxes.
Tax avoidance is NOT tax evasion. There is a big difference between the two.
I don't see anything actually new here. Technically the US gov already has the right to refuse entry to people who have renounced US citizenship, they just haven't been enforcing it. And they can already tax assets over $2 million as if they were sold immediately prior to renunciation of citizenship, and can continue taxing you for up to 10 years after renunciation (see HEART Act). This place turns into the Soviet Union a bit more and more every day.
it is if they have sizable fortunes.
People who renounce their citizenships are not the kind of people who you will see standing in line at Walmart.
There is a big difference between somebody who expatriates and somebody who is playing lawyer games. The reason we have judges and juries interpreting the law is not to literally follow the rules but to apply some brain power to see past the literal and what is really going on. A tax cheat is not the same as somebody how moves away. We have to stop thinking of law as computer code and turning our brains off and processing law like a mindless computer. It is just a step above speaking rudely in a foreign language in a friendly tone - technicalities are no excuse for blatantly violating the entire purpose.
ACORN was a matter of funding; the budget is not law.
Ex-post-facto laws happen despite being unconstitutional but we allow them sometimes. Like how John McCain was asserted to be a natural born citizen when he is not due to ex-post-facto. He is not eligible to be president under the constitution; the irony is the Obama birther stuff - but they surely would have allowed ex-post-facto if McCain won...
Corporations use far more social welfare than people and they should pay when they leave after getting fat on the public's dime (this is done in smarter nations.) I could see how reasonable arguments can be made to extend the corporate reasoning to individuals.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I once worked with a guy named Zoltan. He insisted he was not an exiled king of Mars, but I was on to him!
Yes they are, if you have ever dealt with the IRS as a expat, or tried to setup banking in another country with the US as your nationality you would do exactly the same thing. No bank wants to deal with you, the IRS requires immense amounts of info on every single account you hold and the fines for making a mistake as unbelievable.
If you don;t plan on returning its actually a decent way out of the IRS system.
I find it quite bad if the Senate is actually doing this in response to one guy leaving. The constitution offers us 2 key protections that I wouldn't want to live without:
* No ex post facto laws.
* No bills of attainder
In other words, the congress is forbidden from using their power to make laws to punish people they don't like especially after the fact. That leads to the worst sort of tyranny. Any law crafted to target one individual (or a very smal group) is effectively a bill of attainder, even if it doesn't mention them by name.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
When did it become patriotic to PAY taxes? I hate facebook, and probably wouldn't even like this guy. But cheers to Eduardo Saverin for figuring out a way of depriving this corrupt and unjust government from gaining even more tax dollars to spend on war, giveaways to special interest groups and civilian spy programs. It's your patriotic duty to avoid all the taxes you can. Maybe if Chuck Schumer would focus on cutting his spending proposals for once, instead of on how he can squeeze more money out of his constituents, he could finally deliver a balanced budget.
Back in 2007, Halliburton was making so much money off no-bid war-related contracts, it moved headquarters out of America in order to avoid paying taxes on all the money it was making from the US government.
Very clever Mr. Schumer!
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Not quite as american as these guys:
Larry Echohawk
Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Tom Cole
Brad Carson
That is unless these guys don't actually meet your standard of "American" based on names.
Or maybe these are what you're looking for
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Ander Crenshaw
Mario Diaz-Balart
So it is the names or the party affiliation that makes them more or less "American" in your book?
I got here through a series of tubes
Didn't the Beatles move to the US to avoid The Taxman? I guess it's ok to come to the US to avoid taxes, but you shan't dare leave...
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Agreed. This guy is trying to dodge taxes on 9 BILLION dollars. Cut that to just 2 billion dollars times 1700 people. taxes at 50% - that is over a trillion dollars in tax revenue. So they just paid for the Iraq war. We can spend the rest of the money on teachers and policeman. I got no issue with that. Or they can move to Mexico, have their children kidnapped/killed by a drug cartel, and wish they had stayed here. Seriously what other country are billionaires safer in than here? Jeez!
They aren't doing it to get Saverin after the fact.
They're doing it to make goddamn sure that nobody else gets any similar ideas.
Rather like the Berlin Wall, or other forms of capital controls. If Atlas starts to shrug, you chain him down.
Mod parent up, I was thinking the same thing. This is political grandstanding.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
If a guy leaves because he has to pay $67 million after earning $4 billion then he doesn't deserve citizenship.
It was the 'system' who allowed him to earn that money in the first place.
No sig today...
He has the unfortunate position of being the highest profile case in the past several years. Making an example out of his attempt to dodge taxes might discourage others from doing the same.
don't we have much bigger things to worry about? This isn't a common case....well, it might be if things continue the way they are going.
Yeah, the "Ex-PATRIOT Act" sounds like just a bunch of bullshit political theater. In the case of Saverin, the U.S. will lose an estimated $67 million dollars in tax revenue. Now consider that this $67 million wouldn't even pay for a single F-35 fighter ($195 million), or 6 hours of fighting in Afghanistan ($300 million per day). It's a drop in the bucket compared to the overall defense budget ($700 billion) or entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid ($1.5 trillion).
Schumer is just posturing, this bill won't do a damn thing to address the real issues- a poor economy, excessive government spending, and low tax rates- it just seems to be an attempt to distract from the deep problems we face by stirring up popular resentment against one filthy-rich individual.
Here's the situation. Most economists agree that it's not going to be possible to get the deficit under control by either just increasing taxes, or just cutting spending- we're going to have to do both. The question is whether it's going to be possible to raise enough money by just going after the 1%. The 1% do make a ton of money, but there's just not that many of them- only 1% of the population, after all- so even if you taxed them all at 100% it wouldn't balance the budget. That means tax increases on the middle class, who are responsible for the bulk of U.S. federal tax dollars.
Companies incorporate in Delaware due to low state taxes.
You do not need a physical presence in Delaware to incorporate there, just a registered agent.
... you were born in the USA, but moved to another country, and weren't allowed to become a citizen there without sacrificing your citizenship in your country of origin?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Don't smoke, don't feed the homeless, don't pick which lightbulb you like, etc., etc.
Your own food is too fatty, salty, etc.
Liberals don't believe in a right to privacy except for the sexual sphere of life. They are busybodies par excellance.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
But he is moving to Singapore which has a zero capital gains rate - so unless the U.S. drop's it's capital gain to zero....
On the other hand, it's not like he is not paying his taxes. When he drops U.S. citizenship he has to pay capital gains tax on the FB stock as if he had sold it - so he will be paying taxes. Add to the face that many slashdotters think that FB stocks is going to zero soon it would be in the US interest for him to pay capital gains tax now. What is happening is the US is forgoing potential future capital gains.
And in the larger picture, we should be less petty. If we want to grow that means engaging in the world. In order to attract the best people and best opportunities we need to be open. If we selfishly hold to tightly to what we have today we won't have it tomorrow.
If he gave up his citizenship, he is no longer a citizen of the US and gets none of it's protections. He is not being charged with a crime after the fact, he is just not getting back into the country he renounced.
If a guy leaves because he has to pay $67 million after earning $4 billion then he doesn't deserve citizenship.
It was the 'system' who allowed him to earn that money in the first place.
Wait. The 'system' allowed him to earn that money? You mean the 'government', right? They don't do shit to help people earn money. They do everything they can to take earned money away. Why else would they be after him and threatening to end people's citizenship because of this? They didn't get 'their cut'? Sounds more like the mafia than a government.
What's this guy's fair share for that infrastructure? Do you want to exclude all the items not needed for Facebook? Does Facebook need to pay for HUD, NASA, etc.?
And doesn't Facebook already pay corporate taxes, payroll taxes, and provide jobs and a service to the public at large?
The government exists to enable commerce, but that doesn't mean the government should have whatever percentage it wants.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Is it an ex post facto law though? It sounded like he hadn't actually dodged the taxes for the IPO yet.
Taxes are for the poor and the ignorant. The tax laws are written by wealthy law-degree wielding politicians and their corporate campaign contributors. There are no "accidental" loopholes. If you are middle class, live frugally all your life, you are sooner or later going to be in for a rude awakening. If you are an emerging rap star, athlete, lottery winner, or you inherit your great uncle's farm, you are going to get nailed. But if you come from wealth, or if you come into wealth through scheming, nepotism, and bribery, then you likely know how important it is to have a good wealth management company, tax advisor, and asset protection attorney. This is why you read about rich people declaring bankruptcy and then buying out some multi-million dollar company in just the next year. At some point your wealth grows to such an extreme point that you must protect it from the greedy masses of democratic societies. This is the world where you
incorporate in the Cook Islands
bank in the Cayman Islands
maintain residence in Monaco
maintain citizenship in Switzerland
register your yacht in the Bahamas
spend most of your time traveling the Caribbean and Pacific Islands
It doesn't hurt to befriend a lonely and isolated dictator or two.
That said, I'm pretty sure this isn't going anywhere. Republicans, for one, will oppose it just because it comes from Democrats.
Or maybe the fact that it will cost more money to get this law written, debated, passed and enforced than we would see from it. Or is this more about envy because someone is making more money and not paying taxes on it?
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
What do you think allowed Facebook to incorporate in the first place? What do you think allows them to issue stock? What do you think allows private individuals to own property (such as stock)?
Finally, they are not threatening to end his citizenship, HE RENOUNCED IT.
Are you really that stupid?
Pass a law to dictate that Facebook share price would go down after IPO, therefore punishing the guy who gambled the price would go up.
Remember, the dude has already paid the exit tax when he renounced citizenship, based on the FMV of his shares at that time. He'd only save tax if the share actually go up.
You want more laws, Senator? Here is the ridiculous law for your revenge.
If you think the government deserves credit for "allowing" someone to create a successful business, you're a lost cause.
It takes a very small government indeed to create the basic social order needed for a business to operate, and indeed that's a vasnishingly small portion (measured monitarily) of what our government does. Our government is mostly a pension plan with a military, and everything else it does is in the small "other" slice in the pie chart.
Sure, a few pennies from every dollar in taxes go towards the stuff you're talking about but it's the other 80+ cents per dollar that people are complaining about when they complain about taxes. It takes willful ignorance these days not to realize this.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I must be one of the only ones here agreeing with this move, and I find all the fearmongers and FUD-spreaders comparing this to Communist Russia more than a bit amusing.
Saverin was able to amass his wealth specifically because of the overall environment which existed in America. If Facebook was started in Singapore, there's now way that it would be where it is today. As such, he has an obligation to pay back into the system that fostered his wealth in the first place. If he wants to renounce his citizenship in a bid to avoid that obligation, don't let the door hit him on the way back.
A person who renounces citizenship - something which thousands of people dream about achieving someday - so readily simply to avoid taxes should be barred for life from reentering the country. If they don't want to pay back into the system, they have no right to enjoy the benefits it provides.
In my opinion, it's worth the loss in whatever taxes he owes just to get leeches like Saverin out of the country for good.
How about applying the same sort of treatment to companies that resort to similar manipulations to obtain tax benefits? That should have been evident years ago... seems to me that congress has a biased agenda here.
Citation needed on actual income and worth of people giving up US citizenship. These data are sadly missing from all the articles I've seen implying that it was all wealthy people. I know a couple of them, they were not wealthy by any means, but it just became a better choice given all the US laws concerning financial reporting from foreign banks.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
If you renounce your citizenship, they make it pretty much impossible to return to the US anyway. They do not treat you well at the border if you try to enter. Imagine the scene as the armored USA-USA border patrol looks at your papers. They specialize in making AMERICANS miserable; imagine indeed what they do to "traitors".
You don't come back.
No. My playing the game for subtle black humor. I'm like AliG in ASCII.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Maybe I should have included a :-) ?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
People who renounce their citizenships are not the kind of people who you will see standing in line at Walmart.
Not true.
When this citizenship renouncement thing started seeing significant coverage a few weeks back, one of the scenarios was the US citizen who doesn't live stateside, but has a NON-citizen spouse whom the IRS requires incoming reporting for. On the one hand, I see the tax-shelter possibilites that they're trying to head off at the pass, but on the other hand they can get bent, as it's none of their business.
There have been people quoted as having said things along the lines of, "I love my country, but I don't want a divorce". I, for one, would do it if they were doing that to the non-citizen Love of My Life, and I had no plans of coming back anyway.
Ordinary people are renouncing their citizenship, too - it's not just the uber-wealthy. Do a quick search and you'll see.
The government is effectively paying him $67M to take $4B and invest it in Singapore instead of the US.
More power to him, so long as the government is insisting on getting paid AMT or capital gains now on unrealized income from an appreciated investment which hasn't been sold.
The problem is that they want their poind of flesh now, rather than waiting for it to turn from an investment into "mall money" (money you can take down to the mall and spend).
I knew, though not well, a Netscape guy who was a paper multimillionaire when the Netscape IPO happened. In order to make it a long instead of a short term capital gain, and thus pay less tax, he did an exercise and hold, rather than a same day sale. Then the .bomb happened and the stock price tanked. So there he was with a couple hundred thousand in share value, and the government wanted their 35% of the $27M they valued it at at the time the options were exercised.
Eventually he killed himself, rather than going to Federal (debtor's) prison for tax evasion, since you can't dismiss taxes owed through bankruptcy.
Capital gains taxes as a matter of public policy are potentially defensible, even though they make you pay taxes on an investment of after-tax income and therefore amount to a surtax, but AMT is just asinine: the government can wait to get its money until I get my money.
-- Terry
We have the party of "I know this won't get passed but it'll get me votes" and the party of "I know this should get passed but saying no will get me votes".
Not saying it's always both, or that there's anything wrong with the principle of trying to pass it anyway or trying to say no anyway. But it shouldn't be so damn common...
Yeah wasn't sure, if you were joking or not. Sorry for the rant.
I got here through a series of tubes
start from a position of honesty and integrity
That, I believe, is the "reverse cowgirl".
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
No prob. I DO think that Barack Obama hates Black folks, 'tho.: http://blackagendareport.com/content/why-barack-obama-more-effective-evil
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Zuckerberg apparently swindled him out of 10s of billions of dollars, so you can't really blame him for being very protective of his last 4.
If a guy leaves because he has to pay $67 million after earning $4 billion then he doesn't deserve citizenship.
The guy in question didn't just "leave" - he has renounced citizenship himself. The bill in question would tax him anyway.
You know the other country that used to charge people money for leaving (if allowed at all)? The USSR. When Jewish immigrants left the country, they had to basically leave all valuables behind.
"Groups that have has a lasting impact on the social order -- the Populists, the original Progressives, suffragettes, labor, blacks -- organized outside the party system; indeed, when they were brought in the tent, they became less effective. The public has been told, again and again, the only choice is to hold your nose and select one of the two parties. It's time we recognize that that myth no longer serves us. "
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/05/barack-obama-the-great-deceiver.html
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
There are a few other advantages to being a Delaware entity. For one, Delaware is the only state in the union that does not have a provision in its laws for a judgment creditor to levy a debtors bank accounts. The caveat is that to take advantage of this one would need to deposit at a bank that does not have any branches outside the state. Otherwise, creditors could have your account levied by executing on the branch outside of Delaware, and thanks to the interstate commerce clause of the US Constitution, the Delaware branch would have to turn over the assets. There are many other laws on the books in Delaware that provide special protections to corporations and trusts as well.
Will this include a provision for punishing leave-behind relatives?
God, how East Germany of Schumer!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
If you think the government deserves credit for "allowing" someone to create a successful business, you're a lost cause.
It takes a very small government indeed to create the basic social order needed for a business to operate, and indeed that's a vasnishingly small portion (measured monitarily) of what our government does. Our government is mostly a pension plan with a military, and everything else it does is in the small "other" slice in the pie chart.
Sure, a few pennies from every dollar in taxes go towards the stuff you're talking about but it's the other 80+ cents per dollar that people are complaining about when they complain about taxes. It takes willful ignorance these days not to realize this.
I'm not the GP, but I guess you're right. I think your assertion is crazy. Remember we are talking about Facebook, which requires the internet to exist in the first. The internet is one of those projects created by throwing ridiculous amounts of money at the military. And that's not to mention all of the infrastructure and education funding which meant Facebook actually had employees and customers.
Feel free to run your businesses entirely in Sri Lanka, but in the real world, governments are useful and taxes are needed to fund them.
Preventing someone from preventing you counts as allowing, no?
Let's put it this way: I can't be alone in wanting to kick Zuckerbeg's long smug face in. Why haven't I? Because the eeevuhl commernust taxpayer funded cops would either stop me before I'd cured his ugliness or catch me afterwards and stick me in PMITAFP or Gitmo.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You've lost me. An American drop owns something ... somewhere .. that doesn't appear in the sentence. And some unnamed neuter object (perhaps the one that just went missing) has (or is) most excellent.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The bottom 65% don't pay taxes? Are you talking about the US? Do you have a citation for that? I think I am in something like the bottom 10% and I most definitely have to pay taxes. And I most definitely do not get back anything but a tiny fraction as much as I pay.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Why are they safer in Luxembourg? A typical English football crowd could pwn their army, nick their Porsches and drain their wine cellars in about 15 minutes.
Unless the Belgians came to their aid.
Then it'd only take 10, drrrrrTISH.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Consider this...
If you lived in California and thought their taxes were too high, would it be "unpatriotic" if you decided to move to another state?
What if California decided to charge you an exit tax and sent you a bill after you moved? Would you consider that to be fair? After all, you lived in California and were able to take advantage of all the wonderful opportunities and benefits provided by the California government.
After you have sold all your property and moved out of California, you now work in Florida and earn all your money in Florida. However, the state of California says you still must report and pay taxes on the money you earn in Florida. They give you credit for Florida taxes, but they still want want you to pay taxes on your Florida income. Also, besides making you pay taxes, California wants you to give them the details of any financial accounts you have in Florida. Would you consider that to be fair?
Here's another scenario...
Let's say that both of your parents were born in California, but you were born in Florida and have lived there all your life. You've never even been to California.
One day, you receive a tax bill from the state of California. They claim you owe them taxes because both of your parents were California citizens, so therefore you must be a California citizen and owe taxes there. Would you consider that to be fair?
-------------
If you think the above situations are ridiculous, then just substitute "USA" for "California" and "Singapore" for "Florida". Then you'll discover that everything is absolutely true. You'll also discover why many people have made the quite rational decision of renouncing their USA citizenship.
The USA is the ONLY country that requires its non-resident citizens to report their world-wide income and pay taxes on it. If a USA citizen moves to Singapore, they are still legally required to report their income and pay taxes back to the USA. They are also required to report any financial accounts they may have in Singapore. A Canadian or Brit (or a citizen of any other country) living in Singapore has no such requirements. Not even citizens of semi-socialist countries like Sweden and France require their non-resident citizens to report foreign accounts or pay taxes back home. They may be required to pay taxes in Singapore, but once they've been gone from their home country for a certain period of time, they are no longer required to pay taxes there.
Think the last scenario mentioned above is far-fetched? It's not. There are thousands of American citizens living in Canada who have never even set foot in the USA. Their parents were American, so that makes them American citizens. Now the IRS is going after them and requiring them to report their Canadian assets (like bank and retirement accounts) and to pay taxes on income earned in Canada.
Instead of spouting ignorance, do your homework and you may discover why Mr Saverin's decision makes perfect sense. Especially when he is originally from Brazil and may not have any deep connections to the USA.
The USA is not the home of liberty and freedom. USA tax policies are anti-freedom and out-of-step with the rest of the world. It's like telling a slave they are free to leave the plantation, but you still have to pay money back to the plantation owner. After all, you had the "benefits" of living on the plantation.
Some taxes are necessary, but if you think the current tax structure and bloated government is reponsible for "creating the internet" or other such nonsense, then think again. Yes, the original internet may have been created by the government-funded DARPA project, but do you really think that we would not have something like the internet today if DARPA had never existed?
Do you think that the telegraph and telephone would not have been invented if Morse and Bell had never lived? Do you think man would never have flown if the Wright brothers had decided to stick to bicycles? How did radio and television co
If a guy leaves because he has to pay $67 million after earning $4 billion then he doesn't deserve citizenship.
I don't really understand what 'deserve' means in that context - he doesn't want US citizenship.
My point was that the only way we could undercut Singapore's zero capital gain rate would be to drop the tax or impose a negative tax.
If Saverin's main point is to find a find the lowest tax regime, and his primary income is from capital gains, Singapore is going imposable to beat.
The best way to have the full protection of the US Constitution is to pay your taxes and not renounce your citizenship...
Small government? Small government gave us Love Canal, the Housing Crisis that only took down the entire U.S. economy and gave the world's economy the flu, Enron, the toxic sludge flood in West Virginia from the Martin County Coal Corp., L.A.'s air quality before the EPA forced them to clean it up, etc...the list is quite long.
Small government means no FDA to make sure your prescription isn't ground up beetles. It means no high fund to fix the interstate network's bridges (yep, those states are going to get right on top of that one). No NTSA to do post mortems on plane crashes because you can always trust the airlines with your safety. No SEC to make sure you aren't buying that swamp land masquerading as a gold fund.
Grandma doesn't get her SS check, you know the one, the one that prevents her from having to move in with you. Grandma also won't get her medicare, you'd pick up her medical expenses for her, right? While we're at it, lets turn the mentally ill out of their group homes, you have some extra room in yours, right?
The list goes on. Fucking grow up already.
Delaware's also home to the bankruptcy scam judicial system, the one that trusted and still does SCO.
What example? All he has to do is tell us to fuck off, this is just grandstanding and Unconstitutional grandstanding at that.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Actually you could argue that it was the education that he received in Brazil that allowed him to take benefit of the system and make money. And his genes which he got from Brazilian parents. Because if simply "system" were enough to make you billionaire, everyone in the system, i.e. every American would be a billionaire.
Thousands of immigrants (including myself and either you or your ancestors) come from rest of the world to US shores. We learn on taxpayer's money in our home countries. And when we are of age to really start producing, we come to USA, which is totally unfair to our home countries. That is hard choice, but nonetheless we make it. Because USA is good place to live. People in our home countries don't like it, but on some level they understand the choice and welcome us nonetheless when we go back.
Do we as immigrants benefit from USA as a country? Certainly yes. But USA also benefits from getting talented, educated people with new ideas having directly available for work, without spending a penny on their education and upbringing. If USA did not benefit, it would simply not allow us to immigrate. Try being a 60 year old and immigrating here.
That's why I don't understand the outrage. Are you complaining this renouncing citizenship thing as unfair? But then why didn't you complain when you were "in money" in this game? Why shout only when things are not in your favor? That just sends a bad signal.
Is this to say that companies like GE, Apple, and most of the other huge multinational corporations will actually have to pay a proper tax rate?
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
The most rabid right-wingers seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem. Pay attention to the part that says "for one". It implies that there are others, just like it, but that aren't mentioned. Once you demonstrate that you have the physical capability to understand what someone is saying, we will move to actually discussing whether this is a good idea or a bad idea.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Wow. Fear monger much? And if you think our government was "small" when the bad events happened I would really hate to see your idea of a big government.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
It means no high fund to fix the interstate network's bridges (yep, those states are going to get right on top of that one)
Why the fuck do you think the states have zero money to tackle any of this crumbling infrastructure?
It's the same reason people don't have any money to start businesses, businesses don't have money to hire people, etc:
THE GOVERNMENT KEEPS TAKING IT ALL FROM THEM
Why else would they... They didn't get 'their cut'? Sounds more like the mafia than a government.
What do you think the mafia is? It's a (primitive, might-makes-right) government that regulates the black market. The only difference between Al Capone and a third-world warlord is that Al had a big, well-established organization that had already claimed his territory.
And as a side note, this guy already gave up his citizenship, the law in question would only add an 'exit tax' - like the gangs make you pay when you get out of prison.
Well the real question is (which makes all the difference): were those the 1700 smartest, or dumbest people in America?
He left the US and renounced his citizenship a year ago. Only now is it news because of the IPO? Schumer is one of the worst for totalitarian Marxism in the senate. He should be tied to a tree upside down and fed Ex-Lax for a month.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
You're overall right, but I just want to point out that the bottom 65% do get taxed, heavily. Some of it is in sales tax and other such, others are hidden taxes, like traffic/parking tickets, fees, fines, costs, etc etc etc which are tacked onto everything. The leeches have worked their way into every aspect of our lives.
The looters show their true colors---maybe this will cause a mass exodus of even more productive people, and their wealth, to places they won't be preyed upon (nearly as much, at least).
Liberty in your lifetime
The most rabid right-wingers seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem. Pay attention to the part that says "for one". It implies that there are others, just like it, but that aren't mentioned. Once you demonstrate that you have the physical capability to understand what someone is saying, we will move to actually discussing whether this is a good idea or a bad idea.
Relax, bud. I agree with nearly everything you said. Maybe not the "shithole" part. With the amount of money that this guy is going to make, very few places will be a shithole for him.
I was merely pointing out that this is more about class envy than paying government bills. I keep hearing "RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!" even after it's been proven to those screaming that it won't make a dent in our budget, much less the deficit.
Good idea or bad idea? I'm afraid I'd have to go with bad. Like you said, if he doesn't want to be here, good riddance. I wish him well.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
If you think the government deserves credit for "allowing" someone to create a successful business, you're a lost cause.
...Especially if said successful business depends entirely on the Internet. In which case, credit for "making it possible to exist at all" would be more appropriate.
What nations are you looking at that prove this theory, and why didn't facebook start there instead? (Or Microsoft, Intel, Apple, Amazon, HP...) To me this is much more convincing evidence than the opposite view, which is that successful companies and individuals rarely credit their circumstances for their success - which means nothing, because the human ego does not work that way.
People also grossly over-estimate how much tax money goes to whatever they consider waste because it avoids addressing the real problems, which are hard. The fact is the vast majority of funding goes to programs that people want. But you ask people, and they incorrectly think a big percentage of the money is going to NPR, or foreign aid, or muffins for breakfasts at GSA conferences. Or they're a young person who doesn't want Social Security or and old person who doesn't care about education (in which cases statistics show that the same individual most likely did or will want those services at a different time of life).
blah blah blah. Even with the oppressive government, I still managed to start a business, pay rent, eat delicious food, buy luxury items, etc.
But more importantly, what makes you fucking think the STATE government is any better at maintaining infrastructure, etc than the FEDERAL government? "Let's get rid of Big Government! But let's increase the responsibilities of the State!" how the fuck does that make sense to anyone that proclaims to be for "small government?" /* Why the fuck do you think the states have zero money to tackle any of this crumbling infrastructure?
Big Government is Big Government whether or not it's at Federal, State, or even Local.
THE GOVERNMENT KEEPS TAKING IT ALL FROM THEM */
I mean, surely you see the fallacy there? The government doesn't have any money because the government takes all the money... State government is still "The Government".
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
I am not talking about people renouncing citizenship to dodge taxes. I am talking about how expatriate get taxed in the normal, income sense of the word.
US citizens get taxed twice when they work overseas. Once locally, once by the US.
Foreign citizens who work in the US get taxed only once - by the US.
Yes, there is some tax relief written in the tax code, but it makes things harder and more complex. If a US company wants to expand overseas it puts them, and any US citizens they want to hire, at a disadvantage.
And, to your point directly, I am o.k. with people who renounce their citizenship to come visit the US. I would be o.k. if Terry Gilliam (Monty Python, Brazil) came back for an extended stay in the US. We live in a global economy. If we expect to lure top flight talent to the US we kind of have to play fair and expect some the talent to flow the other way. Being small and petty will not help the US. And it looks like Saverin is paying the taxes due as per the law, I have no issue.
Yeah, the government had nothing to do with the creation of the internet, the roads he uses to drive to work every day, the electrical grid that powers the computers used to access Facebook, the funding of the educational institutions that formed the initial userbase of Facebook, or the propping up of the financial system that completely shat itself in 2008! We better hope this John Galt doesn't decide to withdraw his enlightened ability to create wealth from our society or we're done for!
Seriously, if you could stop masturbating to Ayn Rand for three seconds and actually think about it, maybe you'd realize that public investment in infrastructure and research is a huge part of what made this country what it is, and the fact that we've been underfunding them for almost thirty years is, while hardly the single cause of our national decline, certainly not helping things.
And the Slashdot summary is, as usual, a fucking travesty. The "renounce your citizenship specifically because of taxes and you're not allowed back in the country" clause is already law and is part of the form you have to sign to renounce your citizenship. What the article actually says is that Schumer and Bob Casey are proposing a special tax on people who renounce their citizenship specificially to avoid taxes.
Contrary to public opinion, there are nicer and cleaner girls in the USA than in China. You just need to know where to look for. Also as a plus our ass is safe thanks to the world strongest military.
New Economic Perspectives
If you think the government deserves credit for "allowing" someone to create a successful business, you're a lost cause.
The GP said the government allowed him to incorporate, not allowed him to create a successful business. Yes, the incorporation process is a (relatively) modern legal procedure enabled by government. No, a business doesn't need to be incorporated to be successful.
Depends on what kind of Free World you mean. Singapore is on the top of the list for economic freedoms and at the lower end for political freedoms.
The problem is... There's no backing within the Constitution for such an action. None.
They're just pissy because he found a damn loophole they knew nothing about. He opted out.
What are you babbling about? There's nothing in the Constitution at all about immigration. Thus the Federal government sets immigration regulations by legislation. If enough congress members and the president would sign on, they can do anything from seal the borders completely to letting anyone wander in freely at any time for as long as they want. Either way would be completely OK with what's in the Constitution.
No Government has a Right to Tax. Admittedly they could and probably have a right to deny service to those on their 'do not patronize' list, for non-payment or for other reasons, but I have the same right. Exactly what service is a traveler abusing merely by visiting a territory some Government claims as "theirs"?
Small government gave us Love Canal,
You're right, but not in the way you think. The Hooker Chemical Co. was forced (by local govt) to sell the land their chemical dump was under. They sold it with the proviso that nothing ever be built on it. The government later overruled that proviso.
Government is just people. Most of them (both in and out of government) are idiots. Personally I prefer to give idiots as little power as possible. Sure, they do some good things, but when they fuck up, they fuck up big time. Go ahead, dig into the housing crisis and Enron too, and you'll find fucked up government policies amplifying the bad that greedy individuals did.
-- Alastair
This is fabulous. Now the US is akin to China in its most repressive periods, and very similar to Communist Russia and East Berlin. Will US citizens need "exit visas" soon as well? I don't think this is what the founding father's imagined when they drafted up the Constitution. This is just another form of repression, its just keeps getting worse and worse and joe six pack just does not care.
Real men don't need signitures!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3071886/ns/news-special_coverage/t/double-life-marc-rich/#.T7cmautYugg
Real men don't need signitures!!!
States are governments too.
So, you're saying governments don't have money because governments have taken all the money.
Sure.. hey, pass that over here.. that must be some good shit you're smoking.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
If you think the government deserves credit for "allowing" someone to create a successful business, you're a lost cause.
Why? Since most don't, I'm willing to lavish praise upon those that do.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Fucking grow up already.
Oh, the irony.
Yes, 'the system' allowed him to earn that money. It prints the money and maintains a relatively stable currency in a volatile world market, going so far as to maintain the largest military ever to preserve the nation and influence events in its favour. It built the Internet. It built the roads that move the goods that form the backbone of the economy. It structures and staffs a justice system to make contracts enforceable and reduce corruption. 'The system' is responsible for building and maintaining the circumstances under which Saverin could make billions. And really, 'the system' is nothing more than a bunch of people getting by on far less than Saverin, who don't have the option to emigrate to Singapore to reduce their taxes.
Every billionaire's fortune stands on the tax dollars of those who went before. I don't think handing over 1.4% of it to keep the game going is that fucking onerous a demand.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
I'd guess most of the western world, and possibly some of the non-western world. On the intentional homicides per capita list on Wikipedia, US is on the 26th place of 59 entries. Compared to population, there's 8.5x more homicides in the US than in Austria. However, the numbers are likely worse when it comes to billionaire risk: In Norway (where I'm originally from, 2nd spot on the list), almost all homicides are crimes of passion inside family; in the US, there's more criminally related homicides, a risk I'd expect to be increased for billionaires.
Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
More laws = More corruption
Casteism
I'm afraid I may be biting a troll, but just in case the AC is just stupid and not trolling,
Wait. The 'system' allowed him to earn that money? You mean the 'government', right?
I'm pretty sure if he meant "the government" that's what he would have said. "The system" is more than just the government, it's government, industry, people, infrastructure, the god damned system.
You mean the 'government', right? They don't do shit to help people earn money.
There's no employment office in your town? You don't have minimum wage laws? You have no roads? You have no public schools? All of these are government trying to help you earn money.
Why else would they be after him and threatening to end people's citizenship because of this?
This is why I suspect the AC isn't trolling, he can barely read. It's sad government won't spend more on education, but maybe he's just learning-disabled. Poor paranoid schitzophrenic fool... it looks like a moderator is as dumb as... WAIT A GODDAMNED MINUTE, he IS a fucking moderator and logged off to post without undoing his mods and then logged back in to moderate HIS OWN POST.
No wonder there are so many brain-dead moderations in this thread!
Free Martian Whores!
Indeed. I should write to the Senate:
Dear Chuck,
Can I have $67m too, in return for never again visiting, investing in or having to put up with the immense stupidity of the USA?
thanks,
~etc
More than 100% of federal revenue goes to direct money transfers to the old and the poor. Most of the rest goes to defense, and to service the debt (since we're spening 160% of revenue, that will grow, and fast). Whether or not you like tose programs, they're not "building roads and internet and social order" stuff. We could do that stuff (including the NPR and forieng aid and NASA and all the cheap stuff) on about 20% of our current budget.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Wow, is not reading the comment you're replying to the new fad on Slashdot? Or were you just carrying this rant around looking for a place to crap it out?
Seriously, my enitre fucking point is that all the stuff that you're on about--all that really good stuff the government does like roads and internet and research--is a very small part of the federal budget. That's not what our government does any more.
How many ways can I say it? Most people whu object to the tax burden and the size of government aren't fucking objecting to roads and internet and research, but to the other 80% of the budget: the militay, plus direct money transfers to politically favored people (mostly the old and recently bankers seem to get the lions share of the budget).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The fellow's only reason for giving up his citizenship is to avoid paying his share of the taxes we all must pay. Yes indeed, speaking as an American citizen, he is not welcome here. Plus, he should pay the taxes anyway. The money will flow through American banks to his accounts, wherever those accounts may be. As that flow occurs during and after the IPO, all appropriate taxes should be extracted. He and others who forsake citizenship to avoid taxes should be declared persona non grata, never again to be allowed entry to this country, besides having taxes extracted as their wealth leaves our shores.
I think he was pointing to your illiterate looking "drop's". Why did you do that? Finger slip off the "p" and hit the ' by mistake? That would be my guess. If you'd said "door's" I'd have thought you an idiot since the r ans s are nowhere near each other, but I suspect it's just a typo.
Free Martian Whores!
They are called off-shore holding companies, and plenty of them pay no tax in the US. This is just a legal way for an individual to do the same, and why shouldn't you be allowed to do so if you wish. He pays an exit tax on the value of his stock holdings when he ex-patriated (sp?). Furthermore the US is one of the few countries that taxes its citizen's living aboard. It's not rational to pay taxes when you are not taking advantage of the services your country offers. Furthermore like plenty have said, opening a bank account outside the US when you are a US citizen is a major pain in the ass due to plenty of patriot act and IRS red tape and general bullshit. The guy is just being smart.