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.

48 of 716 comments (clear)

  1. Why is the solution to every problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A) More government/laws

    B) More Taxes

    C) More War

    D) All of the above

    1. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's a reason why Texas' legislature only meets every other year (excepting emergency sessions)

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Texas is far less oppressive compared to more liberal states.

    3. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wake up America, the Democrats are NOT the Dems of yesteryear.

      Sure they are!

      Seems to me, the problem is that at some point people got this crazy notion that certain groups of politicians aren't selfish dicks...

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by thrillseeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Texas' structure seems to be working well for all those people who are *voluntarily* living in (and moving to) Texas. Why does that bother you so much?

    5. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously. Try living in Illinois. Everything is illegal, our taxes are horrible and the state is still broke.

    6. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The other guys?
      It wasn't Bush was asked Congress to add 2 sentences to the NDAA giving the executive branch power to arrest and detain Americans w/o a right to trial. That was Obama. And with 60% (house) and 90% (Senate) of democrats voting for it (House).

      Let's face it..... both parties are pricks. It's about time the Republicans and Democrats merge into one party (since they act basically alike), and a new 2nd party arise so we can have some real choice.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    7. Re:Why is the solution to every problem by number11 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I didn't ask for the government's help.

      I dunno. I could believe that if you don't use government-provided roads, depend on government-provided police to keep the burglars away while you sleep, depend on the government to keep the [insert latest boogieman country here] from invading, depend on corporations that only exist because of government charters, use government to protect you from the most egregious abuses and thefts of those corporations, provide a money supply so you don't have to pay your ISP with cabbages and eggs, keep the mining company just uphill from you from building crappy earthen dams that will maybe collapse and wipe you off of your land, and depend on the government to keep melamine out of the milk you buy. And don't depend on government to allow you to "own" the patch of gawdforsaken land on the mountaintop that you live on and never leave.

  2. Not Just Saverin by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Not Just Saverin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, they're not. Stop the nonsense false equivocation and handwavy accusations at "politicians" as an anonymous but easily vilified class.

    2. Re:Not Just Saverin by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most of them are lawyers. There's an entire field of law dedicated to tax avoidance. Gaming the rules is what they do. Whining that someone else is doing the same is remarkably disengenuous.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Not Just Saverin by Lynchenstein · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And extend this to the "other" people, AKA corporations that do this. Apple, Coke, Microsoft...the list goes on. If you don't like the loopholes, then close them. But start from a position of honesty and integrity before criticizing others.

    4. Re:Not Just Saverin by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The easiest way for a corporation to avoid corporate income taxes is to "increase its costs" - that is, hire more people, raise salaries, and generally do all the things a good citizen of a corporation should do.

      Corporate income taxes aren't like personal income taxes. The biggest "loopholes" aren't really bad things.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:Not Just Saverin by niado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not familiar with all the details of this particular case, but there is a difference between paying as little tax as possible (everyone should be attempting to do this...) and committing tax fraud.

      I definitely agree our tax system is junk and should not have so many loopholes that are exploitable by huge corporations and the wealthy but I really can't fault anyone for doing whatever they can as long as they are acting within the rules.

    6. Re:Not Just Saverin by snowgirl · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not familiar with all the details of this particular case, but there is a difference between paying as little tax as possible (everyone should be attempting to do this...) and committing tax fraud.

      In this particular case, the person was born in Brazil, and living in Singapore, and plans to continue to live in Singapore indefinitely. Sounds like the most rational reasons for forfeiting his US citizenship to me.

      And from a legal standpoint, as long as he holds citizenship of some recognized country then he is entirely free to do so. However, individuals who reside in the US, and have no other citizenships anywhere else cannot just renounce their citizenship to dodge taxes, because international law does not provide for the existence of individuals without a citizenship. So, one can only renounce ones citizenship if one already has another citizenship. (US Courts have also held that a US citizen cannot lose their citizenship without willful revocation of it, since the Constitution guarantees your citizenship. So, no act of Congress or other legislative body can dismiss a person's citizenship against their will.)

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    7. Re:Not Just Saverin by sandytaru · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unfortunately, CEOs and CFOs get their jollies by "cutting costs" in order to please the shareholders. "Increasing costs" sounds terrible to your board of directors. The term used instead is "expanding" and/or "growing" or to be really obscure about it, "investing in future growth opportunities." It's the lack of such expansion that caused the recession to stick around for so long, because even the companies that had the capital on hand to continue expanding were afraid to do so in the off chance the economy worsened again. So, it was "keep costs low" to please the financial markets.

      My very Republican, very stalwart conservative father in law went on an unexpected rant last weekend, regarding day traders of all things. He feels that taxes on stocks kept less than 24 hours should be 90% of profits, dropping to 50% after a week, and then back down to standard capital gains after one year. I'd never thought I'd hear such words fall from his lips, but then again he is a player in the long game of the stock markets.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  3. So like the Soviet Union? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like the Soviet Union where you can't leave?

    Or like Nazi Germany, where you can leave, but not bring any of your valuables?

    1. Re:So like the Soviet Union? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not seeing a distinction there. That's just a mealy mouthed way of saying "we want to take all your shit, and we got guns so pay up".

    2. Re:So like the Soviet Union? by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it is method of saying you used the things our taxes paid for to get rich now pay it back or GTFO and don't come back.

      Do you think a welfare recipient who wins the lottery should be able to avoid paying back what they took by leaving?

    3. Re:So like the Soviet Union? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not about preventing people from leaving, it's about preventing people from leaving solely because they're doing it as a way to cheat the system that is partially responsible for where they are in the first place.

      That sounds familiar. When Soviet Union was preventing Soviet Jews from leaving the country for US or Israel, the most popular argument was that those Jews have enjoyed all the benefits of the socialist society, most notably free university education (but also healthcare etc), and therefore they "owe" it to the state to repay by their work.

      Eventually, USSR has enacted a law where emigrants who had university education, had to compensate the state for it before they were allowed to it. US responded by enacting the Jackson-Vanik amendment (which, by the way, is still in force today).

  4. Why doesn't it read... by ravenscar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

  5. I have to ask by SteelKidney · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.

  6. Sour Grapes by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  7. I have nothing but contempt for tax cheats but by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:I have nothing but contempt for tax cheats but by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that it IS a bill of attainder. It's specifically targeting one individual a senator disagrees with. I'm extremely liberal and have a huge amount of distaste for this kind of evasion, but choosing to punish a choice after its made is wrong. It's absolutely wrong, regardless of whether it's the revocation of a privilege or assigning of a punishment, it falls into the category of judging via law.

      No person should EVER have to fear that a choice they are making will be illegal in the future. One is accountable only to the laws that exist when decisions are made and one's own ethical principles. Saverin has no ethical principles; that's still his choice.

  8. Re:Well this is retarded. by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why are your senators always so mad?

    It makes them look busy.

  9. Re:I understand, but... by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    don't we have much bigger things to worry about? This isn't a common case....

    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.

  10. Re:Tax rates by hierofalcon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Reduce taxes by $67 million != only pay $67 million.

  11. it's envy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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!

  12. Re:Tax rates by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Funny

    So what you're saying is that $64.0 mil should be enough taxes for any government?

  13. Nation of immigrants by bkmoore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  14. Re:Tax rates by Shatrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Investment income is the reward you get by risking your money by investing in a business. Investing in a business gives them capital to buy assets and hire employees.
    It is not something that should be discouraged, unless your myopia extends to economics.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  15. Because they're jealous... by earls · · Score: 5, Funny

    That someone is successfully abusing the system better than they are.

  16. I hope he gets away with it by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  17. Re:Yeah, the nerve. by xevioso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >>Who puts Saverin's house out when it is burning out of control?

    Singapore.

    >>Who paves the roads and repairs the bridges that Saverin's luxury cars utilize every day?

    Singapore.
    >>Who delivers the mail that Saverin relies on for his business and home operations?

    Singapore.

    >>Who manages the pipes and treatment of the shit that Saverin dumps down his toilets every day?

    Singapore.

    >>Who patrols the streets that Saverin lives and works on, protecting him from crime?

    Singapore.

    >>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?

    America, but he lives in Singapore and has for three years so he couldn't care less.

  18. Ah Capitalism, How Sweet the Sting by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  19. It's not to avoid taxes... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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...

  20. Isn't this *already* a law? by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?

  21. Re:I understand, but... by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  22. A sneaky way to put Halliburton in jail... by SethJohnson · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Since corporations have been ruled to be people by the Supreme Court, I'm excited to see the Democrats finally concoct a distraction for enacting legislation that will ultimately put Dick Cheney's employer in jail.

    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.

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-N.H., called the company's move "corporate greed at its worst." He added, "This is an insult to the U.S. soldiers and taxpayers who paid the tab for their no-bid contracts and endured their overcharges for all these years. At the same time they'll be avoiding U.S. taxes, I'm sure they won't stop insisting on taking their profits in cold hard U.S. cash."

    Very clever Mr. Schumer!

  23. Re:I understand, but... by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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...
  24. Re:I understand, but... by bws111 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  25. Re:I understand, but... by Sentrion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  26. Re:I understand, but... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    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."
  27. Re:I understand, but... by gtall · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  28. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  29. Re:Don't smoke... by shiftless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The words "liberal" and "conservative" represent a false dichotomy, promoted by your masters in the news media, and parroted by clueless morons such as yourself who are baffled by the idea that the world does not exist in black and white, but only shades of gray.

    In other words, you're a tool.