Slashdot Mirror
Facebook, Zuckerberg Sued Over IPO
mrquagmire writes with this snippet from CNET: "Facebook shareholders have sued the social network, CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and a number of banks, alleging that crucial information was concealed ahead of Facebook's IPO. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan this morning, charges the defendants with failing to disclose in the critical days leading up to Friday's initial public offering 'a severe and pronounced reduction' in forecasts for Facebook's revenue growth, as users more and more access Facebook through mobile devices, according to Reuters, which cited a law firm for the plaintiffs."
It wasn't because of taxes, it was because of fraud? hmm
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
First! Sadly, because I got in early, I'm sure I'll lose mod points.
Seriously. The P/E was stupidly high before. Now, even under the revised projections, it's slightly stupidly higher. The stock was due to tank in any case. As we used to say on the playground, "NO DO-OVERS!"
...they came up snake eyes. Or, perhaps a five. Either way, you didn't do your due diligence if you thought that Facebook, today, was worth 100:1 P/E ratio with a solid income track record established. Why is it that people want to sue when their bets went bad. Do you sue the track when that clean looking bay you bet to show comes in fourth because they didn't tell you he was off his feed that morning? Do you sue the casino and Nevada Gaming Commission when you don't ply well at the slots because the adjust the payouts since the last months payout percentages were posted?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Deception, lies, and broken trust ... oh wait, that was *just* in the movie. Uh huh.
The suit alleges that only big time investors were apprised that rising use of mobile would affect revenue. This was known to everyone weeks ago, well before the IPO. here's an article from a week prior to the IPO all about the mobile risks
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9257232/Facebook-issues-revenue-warning-over-mobile-growth.html
All the whiny crybabies that got suckered into buying this stinker of a stock now want their losses covered?
Due diligence isn't just a cool sounding term. If you're an investor you've got to assume they're painting a rosy picture to try an convince people to invest. It's your responsibility to figure out if the story is too good to be true.
As trivial as it was to figure out that the Facebook IPO was a ruse, these plaintiffs deserve to have their case thrown out of court.
...to a nicer guy.
A) Saverin hasn't been involved in the running of facebook in years, and certainly had nothing to do with the IPO, so he will not be the target of this lawsuit in any way.
B) He did give up his citizenship for tax reasons, but not the tax reasons everyone thinks. He cannot and will not escape any taxes on money he made from the IPO, he earned those shares when he was a US citizen and will pay full taxes on them. He renounced his citizenship because he hasn't lived in the US in 4 years and was tired of paying taxes to the US for money he was making working in Singapore, which isn't that unreasonable.
Anyone who trusted Zuckerberg or believed Facebook could possibly be worthy
of investment deserves to be screwed.
It's called a life lesson. Take it and learn that your own stupidity can and will
have painful results.
Ok, Clearly we need to get a legion of armchair lawyers on this one. How can you have standing to sue the company if the alleged thing happened before you were a shareholder?
She's of Chinese descent, and was born in Massachusetts and grew up around Boston. Nothing Indian about her.
And see what those guys are crying about - that people have started to use Facebook more via mobile phone and that Facebook actually provides good service!
It's not like they're going to carry computers with them in buses and trains anyway, it just means increased usage and therefore more active social network, which is only good. And who says you can't advertise on mobile phones? Android has a huge advertising going on.And see what those guys are crying about - that people have started to use Facebook more via mobile phone and that Facebook actually provides good service!
One of the reasons I left Facebook is because I tried FB mobile and it was a complete waste of time. Not to mention the fact that it increases your bandwidth usage, which you have to pay for, without any corresponding benefit. The entire online experience is going mobile now, and they haven't figured out how to monetize it. What I don't get is why FB is valued so high (74 times its earnings, IIRC). Perhaps they know they have a problem and are basically cashing in and getting out, while the gettin' is good.
Proverbs 21:19
No, Buffet has clearly stated that he will not buy stock in a company, if he does not know how they make money. That is why he stayed away from .com stocks when they were red hot.
In the long run, he strategy has worked out well for him and his investors.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
As one commentator said - "muppet bait".
No sane person/coporation who didn't have their own agenda (hello banks) would value a social chit chat and picture website at 100 billion. And only an idiot would believe it and the shares were worth it
I read the real prize of FB stock is about 10 USD. Then, what do economists know. It's not a science, but more like astrology.
Facebook stock almost back down to it's opening price this morning. I look for it's stock to hit a floor of around $10 in the next 3-6 months.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
He renounced his citizenship because he hasn't lived in the US in 4 years and was tired of paying taxes to the US for money he was making working in Singapore, which isn't that unreasonable.
The USA is actually the only first world country that even taxes their people while they are living overseas. For example in my country you don't need to pay any taxes back home if you live in another country for more than 6 months.
FB is a fad. It's too closed. Too constrained. Too inconvenient. Email and blogs are better.
You're going to need to back that one up. I believe Canada does the same thing.
If there's two there's probably three.
So I'm afraid I don't think what you say is true.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
... the day before the IPO.
This is going to get messy and the only asset Facebook has is its user data.
You do the math.
I'm gonna sue that fucking horse!
But isn't Canada just one of the states of the United States?
So, as I read it; those who did gain a lot of free money in the IPO will have to give some of it to those that thought they should have and the lawyers will get their usual substantial cut.
Just a slight variation on the usual IPO feeding frenzy.
Saying the investors deserve to get screwed because they didn't do their "due diligence". and in some ways that is fair, it's also a large part of the housing bubble that led to a complete economic collapse as people were buying houses at absurd prices with no money down and variable interest rate loans.
So essentially the same people that want to get a fast buck and not doing the foot work to fully understand what they are getting into.
You can blame the guys the set the bear trap all you want, and personally I think we should bring back the guillotine, but you have to consider the average persons inability/stupidity to do the math and understand the issues are really the main problem.
If they had been smart enough they wouldn't have bought the houses or the stock.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
yeah, the one with all the money
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
And oil and water, bitches! Don't even think about comin' up here and *liberating* us.
thanks for runing the fud thread :(
Oh well... good for him. He also invested heavily in several investment (gambling) banks in 2008. He probably knew in advance that they would get bailed out by the taxpayers. Buffett's a bit of a creep.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
if it produces an intangible entertainment service that can be replaced at the drop of a hat, based on mass will and crowd decision making, it isn't worth b-b-b-b-billions of dollars.
They made something like $1billion in profit last year, so they could well be worth billions, even if that gravy train only lasts for a few years. Not $100billion, but a few billion, sure.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Nope, I'm a Canadian who moved to the US. I had to do dual income taxes the first year because I spent a partial year in both countries. After that, it was only US taxes. If I were to actually make income in Canada then it would be a different story, I believe, but I can make as much as I want in the US and not pay income tax to Canada.
In canada we do not no.
You have to pay taxes on overseas income if you are canadian resident, and you have to specially disclose if you have foreign assets over 100k or some number around there. If you are a non resident in canada you still have to file income taxes on income earned in canada, which can then be dealt with through the ungodly myriad of tax treaties.
However, if you are *living* out of canada for more than 6 months you are no longer a resident, and do not pay taxes. You also are not automatically covered for health insurance.
*liviing* is important. You can spend 6 months out of canada and still be considered living in canada if you don't have a residence out of the country, and meet the criteria for strong ties within canada (and don't spend 6 months outside of canada in the same place I would presume).
As far as I know the only two countries in the world with citizenship tax are eretria and the US. (http://renunciationguide.com/Citizenship-Based-Taxation-International-Comparison.html) Although I grant that that source is a bit sketchy. Wikipedia says the same thing (that the source is sketchy and quotes the same information).
umm of course they will continue on their new d-tablet, iPad and sony NOTiPAD :)
Ah, yes, mutual funds. That would be funds managed by people who take a largish percentage whether they make you money or lose your money. What could be a better investment than that? Hint - just about anything. Seriously, just DIY and invest in a broad index. You'll be much, much better off.
You're going to need to back that one up. I believe Canada does the same thing.
False. Canada taxes its residents. Canada does not tax its citizens, unless they are also residents of Canada.
Read the explanation from the Canada Revenue Agency:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/nnrsdnts/cmmn/rsdncy-eng.html
If you want a more detailed explanation of how your residence is determined for tax reasons, you should read Interpretation Bulletin IT-221, Determination of an Individual's Residence Status:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/it221r3-consolid/it221r3-consolid-e.html
So I'm afraid I don't think what you say is true.
ME TOO!!!
1. Find people dumb enough to buy an IPO opening day.
2. Pump up useless social media company
3. Issue stock
4. PROFIT!!!!!!
Perhaps, but the thing that has bothered me about that is that you now have to pay for your bandwidth usage. Who wants their bandwidth sucked up with ads?
I am reminded of what happened 20 years ago with IBM's online service, Prodigy. I remember giving it a try, but you had to pay for it by the amount of time you spent on it. It was monetized by offering ads, but at 2400 baud, watching ads slowly download, sucking up your online time, was painful. The last straw for me was when I had to wait about five minutes for an animated Volkswagen ad to download -- on my dime. I canceled the service immediately. Mobile FB users will feel the same frustration if they have to pay for the privilege of sitting through ads.
Proverbs 21:19
are easily parted.
Korma: Good
you missed the got=not typo. heil grammar!
insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
They seem to always get a piece of the action.
everyone saw how he made the company by stabbing the people closest to him in the back. what did you think he was going to do with the IPO?
insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
The numbers that were available BEFORE the IPO made it look like a terrible investment. The market valuation being projected was WAY too high for even the unadjusted income figures...did these people learn nothing from the IPOs of the dotcom bubble? Apparently not.
Zuckerberg got his billion
sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
Not only that, they tax you if you leave. It's amazing how complicated our tax code is yet we can't provide basic human needs (IMHO) to our citizens.
They tax you if you're born. They tax you when you die. They tax you if you live elsewhere and they tax you if you renounce your citizenship. Yet corporations and the rich manage to find loopholes to avoid a majority of it.
What about the UK? I have heard horror stories about their taxes.
Isn't Michigan part of Canada or least part of Detroit or something like that?
Not true.
:/
In many countries, if you move outside, even for more than 6 months, you are still considered resident (and also required to pay taxes) under certain conditions.
For example, you might still pay taxes if you have personal interests in you country of origin, like if you own property or if you significant other and children still live there.
It is different from country to country. In my case, I am expat from European country living in the middle east more than 5 years already, and I would still have to pay income tax back home in case i owned any property there. I don't, BTW.
Even if the reduced outlook had been more widely publicized, it wouldn't have made a difference. Everyone had stars in their eyes hoping to make it big. Would a 150 P/E ratio have deterred someone who was OK with a 100 P/E ratio? Doubtful. Investors rolled the dice and lost. Had the stock gone up, no one would be complaining.
The buyers expected this would be like every other major IPO in the recent past: the initial offering would be underpriced, then it would shoot up in the first day, which means that the banks and early buyers would have effectively taken money that should have gone to the founders and employees and instead diverted it into their own pockets. But it turned out Zuckerberg was smarter than that, and ensured that the IPO price was actually a bit on the high side. Now the buyers who planned on scamming Zuckerberg and the Facebook employees got scammed themselves. I don't feel sorry for these whiners.
So show us her long-from birth certificate!
Yes, Canada does, though it's tied to residency rather than citizenship.
The CBC had some info on this last year.
England does too.
Uh, no it doesn't.
And, pedantically speaking, England doesn't tax anyone.
England doesn't tax its citizens once you have lived abroad for long enough.
Tweens and tards are the ideal target for advertisers. AOL's problem was that they lost the tweens and tards to cable, Google, and MySpace.
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
the honeymoon is over for Zuckerberg.
USA taxes are incredibly low compared to just about anywhere else (obviously not EVERYWHERE else, but just about).
A lot of Americans believe that for some reason. Mostly, I presume, the ones who've never lived abroad.
I don't know if it's still the case, but, for example, I've read that Switzerland used to offer a flat-rate tax to some high-income foreign residents where they'd pay something like $50k a year regardless of their income. Or they can pay 0% tax in the UK if they handle their money correctly.
Rather close? There's an entire key and half between them and they are hit by different HANDS! I figured it out myself, but still, that's a rediculously unforgivable typo. Even Dvorak and Colemak have the same amount of room between them (though Dvorak uses the same hand, but different fingers).
Screw P/E. Another 4 billion people left to grow baby, booyaah!!! This FB stock is gonna go batman! This is a $100 stock, go Zuckie, go!!
Actually England doesn't, at least not on income tax:
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/incometax/tax-leave-uk.htm
So... yeah, actually it is a pretty ridiculous requirement of being a US citizen.
Does HM Revenue & Customs (or any country's tax entity for that matter) report to the IRS?
Probably, if asked. You're just not important or wealthy enough for them to care.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
but still, that's a rediculously unforgivable typo.
I can't figure out if this is ingenious self-deprecating humor or just run of the mill hypocrisy.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
England doesn't tax its citizens once you have lived abroad for long enough.
The UK doesn't tax its citizens from the day they leave the country to live abroad. You'll only pay tax if you're still considered a UK resident (e.g. if you work for a UK company and they send you to work abroad for a few months).
Belarus is another which taxes its non-resident citizens. You're in great company. :D
Yes, *that* Belarus - the one with a Soviet-style dictator ruling over a command economy.
Not real keen on the meaning of "publicly traded", are you?
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
They know when you left the US based on Customs records, they send you a form and want to know what you made.
...then there's probably four.
and if there's n, there's probably n+1.......
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
Actually, it alleges that only big time investors were given specific revised revenue projections related to that effect.
There's a difference between a vague qualitative description of the effect of mobile and specific quantitative revenue projections based on that effect.
Facebook does not have a locked in market. Its primary asset is the friend network of its members. But that friend network is not owned by them. I am perfectly able to move my friends over to, say, Google+ if I choose, and if my friends choose. Admittedly this doesn't look likely right now, but that doesn't exclude the possibility of a mass exodus. All we have to collectively do is to say to each of our friends, "hey, let's meet over on that other network".
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
Yes that's correct, there are some caveats to it. Are these the same rules as for US citizens? Or are the US laws more stringent?
You're going to need to back that one up. I believe Canada does the same thing.
I love the way you got a plus 5 informative out of making up complete crap and putting "I believe" in front of it. Did you have any reason to believe that? Did it even sound remotely likely?
I'll try to find the birth tax.
The death tax, 'you' are still getting taxed. It's your money even though you're dead. That still counts as a tax in my book.
So if you make more than 91k you get taxed. So, yes you do get taxed abroad.
Expatriation Tax
You can deduct foreign tax paid from what you owe to the U.S., so in the case of U.K. it will most certainly zero out any tax due to the IRS. Knowing that, it's probably not even reported or looked into at all.
:wq
Rather close = roughly 1.25 inches away.
Forget about your thumbs near the spacebar? Not everyone types the same way.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
What about the UK? I have heard horror stories about their taxes.
The UK has a weird status called resident but not domiciled:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_Kingdom#Residence_and_domicile
Effectively that means as a foreigner you can live in the UK, and only pay UK tax on your UK income. You don't pay UK tax on foreign income. You can maintain this non-dom status for many many years.
This scheme is exploited by many companies. They pay you a nominal salary in the UK (and you pay UK tax on that), but the majority of your compensation is paid to you in a foreign no-tax country.
Actually, although your message is clear, the details are not entirely correct. Regardless of how long you are outside of the country, if you have strong ties in Canada (a house, a wife/husband/children/family, bank accounts, etc.) then you are still considered a "factual" resident for tax purposes (http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/nnrsdnts/cmmn/rsdncy-eng.html). You must still FILE taxes, but you don't (necessarily) have to PAY taxes. You pay taxes only on income received from Canadian sources. Any so-called "Worldwide income" is exempt from Canadian taxation as long as there is a tax treaty with the counterparty country (http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/t4131/t4131-e.html#P201_20183).
If you live outside of the country for more than 6 months (6 months plus one day), then you aren't afforded medical insurance. Hence, snow birds who fly back and forth from Canada every 6 months.
Typical, and typically stupid. Anyone who thought Facebook was fairly valued at something like 100x earnings was an idiot. Expecting the stock to go up from there? Really?
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
It's amazing how complicated our tax code is yet we can't provide basic human needs (IMHO) to our citizens.
Oh, we can. We just decided that "teh socializim is ebil!!11!" and that money is much better used on endless clusterfucks of wars to "bring freedom" while domestically creating a police state, and corporate blowjobs.
Face it. If you want the government to do something right, you have to tell them to make a left turn.
Define "make any sort of money". I make $70k a year as an engineer. Compared to most people it's good. Compared to the top it's a drop in the bucket.
I would have absolutely no qualms paying 50% taxes if it meant I got some sort of services for it like they do elsewhere.
I don't think he 'knew' but he probably suspect the odds were in that favor. I would have invested as well.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Specifically, their mobile app sucks. That'll drive people back to the full site. Or so they hope.
B) Wrong, Saverin renounced his citizenship to avoid paying his 15% capital gains tax on his investment in American companies, including his shares in Facebook. Given his financial situation, it is unlikely that he is "working" in Singapore.
You Canadians have all gathered together in large cities right along the border. Looks like an invasion force :)
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
You bet on an intangible product that overvalues itself (based on what I've read), spend BILLIONS on it, and are surprised when the people receiving the BILLIONS are trying to make as much money as possible, even if it's unscrupulous?
Surprised? No, not all, but then I didn't buy any Facebook stock. However, I'm not going to make excuses to allow these alleged white collar criminals to escape a federal prison stay, either. If they committed the crime, they can do the time.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
So that's Mick and Bianca went down to St. Tropez back in the day? All I know is, that it seems every rich person in the UK moves somewhere else, but you are saying that foreigners have it better there. OK I can see that.
In the US you are exempt on taxes up to I believe $85,000 per year so long as you are paying taxes in another country and meet certain other requirements, like length of time outside the country, etc.
Neither does the US, chillax, too much disinformation here passing for a fact
Yes it does, but there's a large exemption before you have to pay. $90,000 if I remember correctly?
England? You mean the UK? And no, they don't.
First he helps destroy the credibility of the concepts of privacy and secrecy in the population, and now, with the 3rd largest IPO in history, he's helping destroy the credibility of the economic system...
I don't know if he's more like Jesus or Lucifer, but damn I'm starting to love that guy...
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Go back to digg, kid. Slashdot is for adults who want to discuss serious issues concerning tech, science, engineering, and other nerdy topics. Oh, and the ocassional joke as well. Check your FAQ, the fud thread is a troll here.
Now shoo. Get off our lawn.
Free Martian Whores!
Is it too late for her to answer No?
No bother, we're going to rape him with the exit tax anyways.
I had to do dual income taxes the first year because I spent a partial year in both countries.
Wha? There are tax treaties, dude. If you actually paid twice on the same income, either you have a very unique situation or you did it wrong. Usually you pay one and get a foreign taxes paid credit for the other.
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
Here's a reference. Only the US and Eritrea are this dumb.
I've lived abroad for more that 20 years, and I am very tired of filing an ever-increasing number of forms with the US authorities. It's not only the IRS, you also have to file separate forms with a separate agency detailing your foreign bank accounts - which, frankly, is none of their business.
The US does allow a deduction against foreign income, but this is worth less and less as the value of the dollar continues to crash. Depends what currency your country uses, of course, but the US doesn't care or make any allowance for that. In my case, the dollar has lost fully half of its value in the last few years. Turn that around: from the IRS point of view my salary has doubled (even though it actually hasn't). Great.
Add to that the pressure the US is applying to foreign banks, in an attempt to rake in money. I won't go into details here, but the US behavior here is closer to blackmail than to any sort of legal proceeding. The result is that foreign banks now ask you up front "are you subject to US taxes?" If you answer "yes", many simply refuse to do business with you. The US government is making it difficult for normal Americans to get on with their lives.
I have also had enough. I will be renouncing my citizenship before the year is out.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
In Canada you file to become a 'deemed non-resident' at which point, if the country in which you are living has a tax treaty with Canada they claim to work it out behind the scenes. It used to be that you had to file every year, but they got rid of that a long time ago, as it was just paper work. Once you became a 'deemed non-resident' they kept that status.
In order to become a 'deemed non-resident' you have to show that you severed major financial ties with Canada. For example, you can't own and rent out a home. If you do your world income becomes eligible for taxation.
(I could go on, but its been a while since I looked at this, and I'd hate to sound to informative).
You have to pay taxes on overseas income if you are canadian resident, and you have to specially disclose if you have foreign assets over 100k or some number around there.
Yep sounds about right, you do have to disclose your investments though. I made around $80k in foreign investments in the last 9mo and had to disclose it, but it wasn't taxed. What was taxed was the primary part of the investment past the initial investment.
Rest of your post spot on though.
Om, nomnomnom...
The sovereign nation is the United Kingdom (England is just one part of the UK, which consists of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). England doesn't raise taxes, the United Kingdom does.
You are no longer subject to UK income taxes the very day you leave the country to live somewhere else. So yes, it is just the USA (and Eritrea) that taxes non resident citizens for income tax.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
This puts an objective value on his non-marital (pre-marital?) assets, which she presumably therefore wouldn't share in case of divorce. Combine that with his $1/year salary (presumably to avoid any tax other than 15% capital gains), and her half of community property grows at $0.50/year. If she works, she might end up owing him money if they divorce!
Disclaimer: IANAL and certainly not a divorce lawyer. Please correct me if I am wrong, which I probably am.
you must be thinking of the ancient slashdot when it was "news for nerds" now... not so much ;)
That's not a large exemption any more because the dollar has been sliding in value for a long time now. It's less than the average salary for software engineers in Switzerland, for instance, and that's with an aggressive currency peg to the Euro. If that peg wasn't in place or was weaker, it'd probably start including all kinds of non-professions, just due to exchange rate disparity.
Isn't Michigan part of Canada or least part of Detroit or something like that?
Not quite, although Canada is one of Detroit's southern neighbours
Actually, Canada doesn't. My brother, a Canadian citizen, lived in Brazil for many years and never had to pay Canadian taxes on money he earned overseas. He works on off-shore drilling rigs and so his workplace was the ocean. He did have to pay American taxes when he worked for an American company and Brazilian taxes when he worked for a Brazilian company. Now that he's moved back to Canada, he'll start paying Canadian taxes again.
They didn't so much "gather". Everybody else just froze to death.
Sounds like there will be a sequel to "The Social Network". That should make Hollywood happy.
What I always wonder about these comments is that doesn't US have some kind of prenuptial agreements? These are common in other countries, especially when the other person has significant wealth compared to another. It's not really even frowned upon, as people understand the reasons.
So why does everyone put so much thought about Zuckerberg losing half of his fortune? For me it would be quite clear that there would be an agreement made before marriage.
What about the UK? I have heard horror stories about their taxes.
I'm a Brit living in the US, and the only tax I pay is to the US government - federal, state and city! Also, the tax system in the UK is considerably easier to operate within as an employee, as your employer handles your deductions and the Inland Revenue calculate how much you owe/are owed. Apart from a few fringe cases, I have never known anyone who was owed money to / was owed money by the Inland Revenue at the end of the year, so I guess the employers know exactly how much to deduct.
Here in the US the situation is far more complicated even for someone in such a trivial tax situation as myself - no investment earnings, mortgage, other revenue sources, etc. I have to wade through hundreds of pages of explanatory documents to fill in boxes which the IRS then go and check independently anyway. What's worse is that most tax software doesn't work for Non-resident Aliens, so the people who most need help with the tax system are left to figure it out by themselves or pay an extortionate fee to an accountant.
No they're not. Most comparisons showing an "incredibly low" tax rate for the U.S. only look at Federal taxes, forgetting that the U.S. has substantial local government taxes which are absent in other countries. If you add up all the Federal, State, and local taxes, the U.S. ends up around a 25%-30% effective tax rate, vs. around 30%-40% for Europe. Lower yes, but only slightly.
Did you even read the article? This is (according to the lawsuit) the 1% illegally using insider information to make money from the rest of us.
The IPO process is broken and needs to be reformed in a bad way. Company insiders and brokerage houses are gaming the system. They are trying to use the public markets as a dumping ground for new public companies so that the new public companies and the brokerages can "take the money and run" and leave public investors holding the bag.
There needs to be new federal legislation enacted to level the playing field for public investors.(BTW: information asymmetry is one of the things destroying the US and preventing everyone here from seizing on opportunities, but that is a subject for another thread). Public investors need to have the same information that the insiders, brokerages, and road show attendees do. Unless this is corrected, public investors will lose faith in IPO's and the country will be sorry for it.
Disclosure: I own no FB stock.
Tax treaties generally focus on earned income. Unearned income (interest, capital gains) tends to fall through the cracks. For example, Canada's tax treaty with the U.S. doesn't cover Roth IRAs. In the U.S., the Roth IRA is a retirement device where you invest income which has been taxed, but you don't have to pay tax on the returns (in exchange for the money being locked up until you retire). If you were a U.S. citizen residing in Canada (thus making you liable for Canadian taxes), you would have to pay Canadian taxes on the returns from your Roth IRA. If you have a high amount of unearned income especially if it comes from atypical sources, you can end up being double-taxed.
No. He split the year. If he left in August, he'd pay US taxes from August to December, but Canada taxes from January to August.
Also, bear in mind that one of the rationales for the U.S. taxing based on citizenship rather than residency (like Canada) is to discourage U.S. citizens from enjoying the benefits of citizenship, but living abroad to avoid taxes.
...he's helping destroy the credibility of the economic system...
How do you destroy something that doesn't exist?
- users increasingly engage with competing products;
- we fail to introduce new and improved products or if we introduce new products or services that are not favorably received;
- we are unable to successfully balance our efforts to provide a compelling user experience with the decisions we make with respect to the frequency, prominence, and size of ads and other commercial content that we display;
- we are unable to continue to develop products for mobile devices that users find engaging, that work with a variety of mobile operating systems and networks, and that achieve a high level of market acceptance;
- there are changes in user sentiment about the quality or usefulness of our products or concerns related to privacy and sharing, safety, security, or other factors;
- we are unable to manage and prioritize information to ensure users are presented with content that is interesting, useful, and relevant to them;
- there are adverse changes in our products that are mandated by legislation, regulatory authorities, or litigation, including settlements or consent decrees;
- technical or other problems prevent us from delivering our products in a rapid and reliable manner or otherwise affect the user experience;
Whoever exercised due diligence did not buy, yet...
http://secfilings.nasdaq.com/filingFrameset.asp?FileName=0001193125-12-034517.txt&FilePath=%5C2012%5C02%5C01%5C&CoName=FACEBOOK+INC&FormType=S-1&RcvdDate=2%2F1%2F2012&pdf=
Jose T Oliveira Jr.
Yeah, H&R Block makes a ton of money during tax time.
Just because everyone jumped in on this and got screwed doesn't mean you can just whine about it and get a do-over. We were all alive and functioning during the dot-bomb where overvalued web companies tanked and billions just dissolved. Just because you have a short memory and don't learn from experience doesn't mean that you should be shielded from the results of your actions.
In other words, suck it up buttercup. You gambled - you lost.
But hey! All is not lost. Maybe I can help you regain some of your lost fortune. You see...I have this friend, a Mr. Mugabe Zombobo in Nigeria, a former chairman of the Unfufu National bank.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
If Canada wants Detroit, they can have it!
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Exactly, isn't that why everyone who is rich in the UK moves to Monaco or somewhere like that? In the US if you get rich you don't have to move, just put your money in a trust and/or securities and pay 15%. Monaco is kinda small so I would expect the rent to be high.
It depends on the state, but generally whatever you have before the marriage, you can keep afterwards. The issue gets a bit murky though when you're dealing with stocks. First off, any dividends earned after the marriage are community property, and typically any increase in the value of his stock (if he sells it while they're married), can also be considered community property, and possibly even if he DOESN'T ever sell it, she might get some of the shares the value of which would match the increase at the time of the divorce. The issue gets even murkier if there's dividend re-investment going on, since now the stock purchased with dividends IS community property, while the rest isn't.
It's better to just not get a divorce. If that isn't an option, it's a much better choice to just not get married in the first place.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
"Surrender her pronto, or we'll level Toronto!"
"Facebook shareholders have sued the social network, CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and a number of banks, alleging that crucial information was concealed ahead of Facebook's IPO. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan this morning, charges the defendants with failing to disclose in the critical days leading up to Friday's initial public offering 'a severe and pronounced reduction' in forecasts for Facebook's revenue growth" ..
That's only SEVEN days for the lawyers to file, must be a record there somewhere. I am also curious as to who really is behind this lawsuit. Did Zuckerberg piss off some financial house by not passing them a humongious bung to handle the IPO. Also who wrote these forcasts and where did they reside these past SEVEN days and how the the lawyers for the plaintiff get wind of them so quickly after the IPO. If they posessed such information prior to the IPO then why wait 'till after the IPO. Would such a lawsuit now provoke a selling scare at which some people might then snap it up at rock-bottom prices. The public have a right to know - you know.
AccountKiller
Bingo, and how many 401K's have actually made money since 2000?
I think someone said it was a province of Canada but it wasn't me.
You have to be resident in Canada (not just a citizen) to be subject to worldwide taxation. The same in true of all other developed nations, they will tax your worldwide income but only if you are resident there normally. Another oddity of US tax law is the repatriation rule whereby US based corporations are subjected to US corporation taxes on income earned elsewhere and already subjected to taxation in that jurisdiction (in effect double taxation), no one else does that either.
That's what I've been trying to say but just couldn't think of Windsor which is in Ontario I think.
AOL's problem was that they depended on users dialing directly into AOL's service... i.e. they went from dialup provider + portal to just portal and from there to irrelevance. Google and MySpace had little to do with it... the internet outgrew AOL's (and Yahoo's) model.
Lets not forget Netscape... same thing. Browser -> Portal -> irrelevance.
-Matt
American and dual citizens residing in Canada pay US taxes on their Canadian tax free savings account http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax-Free_Savings_Account effectively nullifying the whole point of having one.
I sure hope none of the court costs will be paid by taxes, think of all the jobs those guys could create with the bottom 99% underwriting the government services their business consumes.
On shares available for shorting after an IPO... You can't short until you can borrow shares (no naked shorting) and since the facebook IPO was just Friday and even in the normal case, standard settlement is 3-day (and this IPO was royally F-up by Nasdaq), unless your brokerage let you borrow their pre-IPO converted shares to short (as opposed to shares purchased from the IPO), you really couldn't short until the first IPO shares settled (meaning right about now)...
So you really can't read anything into the fact that shares available for shorting not being available until today...
Ah, an authoritarian anti-freedom nanny stater. I never could understand people like you. God damn it, an adult should have the right to fuck his life up any way he wants, whether it's shooting heroin, gambling at the stock market, gambling in a casino, or getting married. I really fucked my own life up with that one, but I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted to be told it was prohibited.
Free Martian Whores!
England doesn't raise taxes, the United Kingdom does.
Well technically my council tax is raised by an English council
I just finished watching the original, and realize that, when all the facts are in, there would be enough material to make Social Network 2. All the twists and turns, including sidebar stories about how the characters in the first movie behaved in the decade following the initial launch of TheFaceBook. Not to mention all the new faces in the boardroom and in "other places". (Did they ever repair the chimney?) And there are so many interesting little details: will anyone have an iPad?
The USA is actually the only first world country that even taxes their people while they are living overseas. For example in my country you don't need to pay any taxes back home if you live in another country for more than 6 months.
This is actually not correct. I've also heard this being said from many other sources, but in reality if, as one example (and I don't think it's the only one), you are a DoDDS (Dept. of Defense Dependents School) teacher living in, say, Europe or Asia - a teacher who is definitely a U.S. citizen - pays zero federal income taxes since they live outside CONUS. One of the 'benefits' of said such job. (FYI: DoDDS teachers typically teach the children of those in the military on U.S./NATO military bases around the world in a totally Americanized school system)
I thought the whole idea of a free market, was it was legal to offer a can of coke for say, $200 USD, or more, if there was no fraud involved. There *may* be in this case, but my understanding is, it was a case of here's Facebook shares, here's what we're selling them for, you choose if you wish to buy them
Er... why?
I'm actually surprised Switzerland, France, Israel and a few others don't have citizenship taxes as well. For those countries citizenship entitles you to a whole lot of protection internationally (from extradition, for your investments etc.). Some countries (notably poor ones) don't have citizenship taxes but they are supreme assholes about what you can take in and out of the country.
Having a citizen who doesn't pay taxes can pose real problems, and having citizenship in certain countries provides a lot of privileges (e.g. having citizenship in any EU country lets you work and immediately claim residency in any EU country sort of thing, I think it's more complex than that though). I remember a few years ago when there was an evacuation of foreigners from Lebanon Canada was cooperating with brazil to get each others nationals out (no idea why brazil). The problem with this plan is that it was costing a shit load of money to get people out, and not all of them would be able to pay it back even if you demanded it of them. So who's footing the bill? Those of us who pay taxes back in canada. Now that's a bizarre rare event and shit happens, but if you can use your citizenship as a shield to get away from something you did elsewhere that does incur a cost to the government.
For most countries it's probably not worth it for the relatively small amount of money they'd get. But I would have expected that a few other places would have had citizenship taxes.
Of course he knew. He owns the politicians who are paying for the bailouts.
unlike if you're an Australian abroad, when the embassy will tell you "tough shit, you're not in .au now." If you're lucky they'll call your folks back home who can send you a care package in whatever foreign prison you land in.
If you're female however, you might have a chance, because you look good in the tabloids and can whip up a good old-fashioned racist fear of our white girls being defiled by brown people. (read also: Schapelle Corby)
TL;DR: Australian taxes buy you no protection overseas. Either find a UK grandparent, and get a UK passport, or do what other Aussies abroad do and pretend to be from New Zealand. This last part is analogous to those American college kids backpacking thru Europe who have the Maple Leaf sewn onto their backpacks, so that the locals don't hassle them about US foreign policy :-)
sustainable living
Maybe not "for" but you gotta admit that all this mainstream pop culture stuff is surely news TO nerds.
Think about your statement for a minute. You do realize that Ross Perot ran, and nearly won, where his platforms biggest goals was to reduce the US tax system to a single postage card sized form for all citizens. Point is: We have know that US taxes have been a wreck for 20+ years.
Now, who do you think lobbied hardest against tax reform then? Who do you think lobbies hardest not to reform taxes now?
1. The people that benefit from the 60,000 pages of tax "law" and loop holes.
2. Tax agencies, and Lawyers that specialize in Tax law.
Most of the US would benefit if it was fixed and fair.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
You generally pay taxes for the part of the year you were in Canada before you moved abroad, not for whole year. I.e. Canada taxes you for the time you're still considered a resident. If you move to country that also taxes you for the time you're resident, then you haven't really been dual taxed. Unlike the US who will double-tax their citizens for the whole year.
You're wrong about the healthcare. Residence status for tax and for OHIP for instance are different.
http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/public/publications/ohip/travel.aspx
definitely much more of a success than Slashdot:News About nerds :)
Perot ran twice, getting 20% and 8% of the popular vote, and not even one electoral college vote. That's nearly won? Please step out of the reality distortion field.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Anger and insults constitute a defective response to a statement of facts on how the US is hurting itself.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
I'm a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, satellite communications engineer, twice deployed to Afghanistan. I have a high IQ and a lot of skill in various disciplines.
Hell, I'm thinking about migrating too. Dumb shits like yourself are a good part of the reason why.
I hope China invades and subjugates this shithole.
It is not the proper job of government to provide "basic human needs". The government should do nothing more than to identify, codify, and protect human rights; which rights consist of not having your life or the means of sustaining your life damaged.
Whenever the gov't extends beyond those basic functions, by logical necessity it violates the rights of some.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Obviously this is info from 1966, but maybe similar things are still happening (or at least happened in the decades since), since you say "every rich person in the UK moves.."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxman
People are complaining that Mark Zuckerberg is dishonest? Shocker.
Well, in your situation, if you make less than $50,000, you could fill out the 1040EZ. I presume you make more than that. If so, then it's really not THAT hard. Get your W2, fill in the amount, take the standard deduction, look up how much you owe in the chart. If you paid more than that, you get the extra back; you owe any you paid less than that.
I know I simplified it, and obviously the tax code could be much easier in general.. But in your situation, it really is not too complicated.
Whoever inherited your money gained money upon your death. Why shouldn't they pay income taxes on it just like they have to pay on everything else?
(If you claim "it's already been taxed", then why is my income taxed when my employer already paid taxes on it?)
Nonsense. If you want the government to do something right, you shut the government down, all of it, then decide what bare minimum of the 'right' things it should do and tell it to do only those things at a very specifically calculated budget and then apportion the taxes to that budget from the States.
You can't handle the truth.
Well, out of your 70K, paying 50% would be 35K.
Clearly, to you it makes sense to pay 35K if every single thing you wanted was covered by whatever government program and all of your charges would be covered in that 35K.
I was fixing my teeth in Germany this year cost 12K (Euro), nearly all of it paid out of pocket though I carry private insurance of-course. That was just one of the things that I had to spend on this year.
However if I had to pay 50% of income in taxes for things I spend on out of pocket, I would overpay by 99% and would still get a shittier service, because I'd have to wait in line and I'd have worse results. Not only I'd be overcharged, there would have been no competition for my money from the sellers, they wouldn't be competing for my money, they'd be getting paid by gov't, so I wouldn't be a client in the first place, just another checkmark in a log book.
No, thank you, but no thank you. It absolutely doesn't make sense to pay 50% in taxes the more money you make. Income taxes are both morally and economically wrong, but progressive income taxes are even worse. At least with regressive income taxes, those who make more money would have been charged less percentage wise, and since they are already buying all of their stuff privately, they'd be robbed less, while those, who are relying on gov't to provide for them with all those programs, would have been paying for it with half of their earnings.
You want fairness? Regressive income taxes are more fair than the progressive type.
You can't handle the truth.
USA used to be the country that 'welcomed self-centered blowhards', that's how it became the wealthiest producer, creditor nation on the planet.
Others will welcome the 'self-centered blowhards' today, it's going to be USA's loss.
You can't handle the truth.
> I see, so you'll only pay for it if you get something out of it? What is it you don't understand about how the other rich kids feel, again?
I'll only pay for it if I see society as a whole get something out of it.
> You want more services? Start paying more in, you can certainly afford it, Richie Rich. Household median is around 45k. Guess what - you're not going to be given more services, you're going to be ASKED TO PAY for more services.
Don't get all high and fucking mighty. I DID pay into it for 6 years. I then decided I wanted to complete my masters. So I went back to college. Long story short I got screwed out of a TA position and found myself without health insurance. So I've progressively developed a hole in one tooth because of a cavity and have a wrist injury that limits me to around 50% mobility because I can't afford to go to a doctor. I've been to the ER ONCE without health insurance. The visit, them to look me over and splint something was over a grand. Then you get 2 bills. You get a bill for $400 from the Hospital for 'renting' a room and all the overhead. And then you get billed from the service that provides the doctor.
That '70k' a year job doesn't start for another month and in the mean time I get to deal with the pain of my tooth because our country has decided as a whole that providing for its citizens isn't worth it.
Second, Fuck You. I'm watching my father die of cancer right now because of this mentality. He has always responded very well to chemo when he comes out of remission. Except 3 years ago his company decided that at 58 he was 'redundant'. So he used almost all the rest of his severance to pay for COBRA for one year for him and my mom. And since that ran out he's been with nothing. He's paid into the system since he was 18 and now he's sitting at the house I grew up in wasting away. He's always been around 220-240 stocky Rugby player. (He still plays at 61 when he gets the chance). The last time I saw him his clothes were hanging off of him and he was considerably thinner. He's also got a chronic cough that is most likely related to the cancer. Do you want to guess what oncology appointment costs? I'm not talking about any blood work or even treatment. Last I heard one bag of chemo was something around $10k.
Until I start working full time again I can't provide for myself, let alone him. I'm hoping and praying that the SCOTUS doesn't deny preexisting conditions. Because at that point I can do what ever I can to make him my dependent in the IRS's eyes and
Meanwhile, what have we spent on the F22 project? How much has Afghanistan and Iraq cost us since 2001? Everyone is going broke but I'd rather live in a country where they go broke taking care of their citizens rather than going broke blowing up someone elses.
I never want my children to be punished for going back to school. I never want my kids to see me wasting away dying of some easily treatable disease because because I lost my job.
So yes. I'll pay into it if I see that it is doing society something. Other than that, fuck off.
So at this point it's been taxed 3 times. And as Andy Dufresne pointed out. Just give it away to your family before you die in increments.
N/T
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
Well, in your situation, if you make less than $50,000, you could fill out the 1040EZ. I presume you make more than that. If so, then it's really not THAT hard. Get your W2, fill in the amount, take the standard deduction, look up how much you owe in the chart. If you paid more than that, you get the extra back; you owe any you paid less than that.
I know I simplified it, and obviously the tax code could be much easier in general.. But in your situation, it really is not too complicated.
Yeah, I'm familiar with the 1040EZ; I've had 2 years experience now. The most difficult part in my case is not the federal but the NY state + NYC tax form which has a large amount of exemptions and deductions for varying circumstances, local school taxes, and a boat load of other things.
Well, in your situation, if you make less than $50,000, you could fill out the 1040EZ. I presume you make more than that. If so, then it's really not THAT hard. Get your W2, fill in the amount, take the standard deduction, look up how much you owe in the chart. If you paid more than that, you get the extra back; you owe any you paid less than that.
I know I simplified it, and obviously the tax code could be much easier in general.. But in your situation, it really is not too complicated.
I should also add that tax forms are full of jargon which has to be pierced before any newcomer to the system can even begin to start.
In Australia, you pay income tax on money you make in Australia even after you've lived overseas for six months.
However, Australia has a fairly wide coverage of Double Taxation agreements, which means (usually) once you become a tax resident of another country (more than half of the year spent living there, etc.) the tax you pay in Australia counts towards the tax you'd owe in the country of residence, so in effect you pay the greater of "Australian tax on Australian income" and "foreign-country tax on worldwide income".
Which normally means that any income tax withholding done for you in Australia is tax you'd have to pay anyway to your country of residence, so it just avoids you getting a surprise giant tax bill once a year.
This includes one with the US, although I haven't looked at the details of it to see if it covers US citizens resident in Austalia.
http://archive.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?ContentID=625
Paul "TBBle" Hampson
Paul.Hampson@Pobox.Com
No, if I owned a property in my home country, I would be considered a resident and I would have to pay income tax on all my income, even the one I made outside of the country.
The USA is actually the only first world country that even taxes their people while they are living overseas. For example in my country you don't need to pay any taxes back home if you live in another country for more than 6 months.
That is just not true. Israel (at least as of 2004) has essentially the exact same policy. Chile as well, and there are many others. (In fact, Chile even taxes foreign residents on income in their country of origin.) Europe is the big exception to that rule, which was in fact one of Sarkozy's arguments against Hollande's plan to increase taxes on the wealthy. He said that Hollande would cause French "job creators" to move to Switzerland and Germany, which would cost France jobs and hurt the middle class. Hmm, where have I heard that before?
And let's be clear about how the US taxes its citizens abroad. If you are a regular Joe Schmo and you move to a foreign country for work, the US allows you to exempt the first ~$100,000 of your foreign income from your US taxes. You can even increase that deduction if you purchase a home with a mortgage in your country of residence. What the US does not allow you to exempt are capital gains and certain types of income that are generated in the US while your are living abroad that are not taxed by your country of residence. For instance, if you earn money on commercial real estate in California while living in Luxembourg, California and the IRS will tax you on that income, but Luxembourg will not. The system is basically set up to prevent wealthy people from moving out of the US to avoid paying taxes on investments and other rich-people earnings that depend on the US and hiding it in Swiss bank accounts. In other words, ordinary wage-earners who are, for example, relocated by their employer to a foreign company will not pay US taxes on their foreign income, but zillionaires can't escape paying (already ridiculously low) taxes on their capital gains just by moving to the Virgin Islands.
Having said that, US citizenship is really only useful if you plan on living in the US. If I recall correctly, Saverin is Brazilian, so if he wants to live in Singapore then there is no reason to keep US citizenship.
Actually, I wrote my thesis on life experience.
I think I'd rather die all in one go - best to get it over and done with.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_taxation#International_double_taxation_agreements
What about the UK? I have heard horror stories about their taxes.
I'm a Brit living in the US, and the only tax I pay is to the US government - federal, state and city! Also, the tax system in the UK is considerably easier to operate within as an employee, as your employer handles your deductions and the Inland Revenue calculate how much you owe/are owed. Apart from a few fringe cases, I have never known anyone who was owed money to / was owed money by the Inland Revenue at the end of the year, so I guess the employers know exactly how much to deduct.
I've had money owed to me from the Inland Revenue, and known other who have also been owed. In my case, I worked full time for half a year (and another half of the next tax year), and in each case I paid tax as though I had been working for the whole year (I guess thats just the way the system is set up, I don't know if this is just the company or standard for the UK). I got it back at the end of the tax year (pretty painlessly, I just called up and said I think I paid more tax than I should have done, they checked and sent me a cheque).
Other ways I've known are usually to do with getting the wrong tax code (often being assigned an "emergency" one when starting a new job), someone changed job and their tax code said they were working at two jobs and it took a while for it to be updated.
Now though I haven't had issues with over/under paid tax, but I work full time for the whole year and, like you said, employers know how much to deduct.
England doesn't tax its citizens once you have lived abroad for long enough.
I was reading an article that claimed that one wealthy businessperson avoided paying some of their tax in the UK by flying their private plane out over international waters so they could claim they owed less tax because they had resided in the UK for less than some number of days. So it might not even be the living abroad - just the not living in the UK.
Well, by the same logical necessity it violates the rights of some if it doesn't. You see, every government decides for a different set of rights because there is no such things als "natural rights", all rights are artificial constructs.
Article one paragraph one of German constitution: "Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority."
This comes even before the right to life and is the fundamental principle of German constitution and also the reason for the huge social safety net in Germany.
If you want to live under a different set of rights, that's fine with me, but do not try to preach your set of rights as the only valid one.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
I love seeing how people interpret statements with their own biases. It was purely with tongue firmly in cheek.
I was mocking all those people who bought into Facebook thinking they were going to make a quick buck off yet another tech stock IPO.
Personally, I think Zucker did the right thing by pricing the stock at the high end. Not because he wanted the max amount of money (although I am sure that was a part of it) but mainly because he didn't want the stock to balloon out of control, only to crash down later.
So, no, I don't believe in all the negative comments others decided to label and troll my comment with.
Just typical /. I think the stock with slowly rise as FB finds a way to cash in on all that data people stupidly put in there. I think it will make $100/share in less than a year.
did you join the air force for the free education or so that you can kill those funny looking foreigners? It obviously wasn't out of any love of the country that gave you what you needed to inflate your ego to such a large level.
WTF?! There are people who aren't fully lingual in English!? ON THE FUCKING INTERNET NO LESS?! My goodness, what has this world come to.
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
So right, that makes perfect sens for rich people to move to someplace that has 0 tax. So if you over tax the rich they will just move somewhere else. And thanks for the clarification.
There were a few songs back then such as "Taxman" and I'm not saying every UK rich person moves but it seemed to be the case with the Rock band members from there. As far as anyone else, doesn't Bernie Ecclestone still live in the UK because as you say things have changed. I just didn't know how much. I the US we get news of an 80% possible tax rate in the UK and that sounds a bit much and unfair not that it is supposed to be fair.
I was just joking, so no one in Canada get mad at me please. The last time we tried to invade Canada we got our butts kicked. In fact I think the so called environmental issues over a Canadian pipeline to the Gulf Of Mexico have more to do with keeping gas prices low in the US since most of our imported oil comes from there and stopping a project like that would limit Canada's access to Global markets that might pay more.
I think that is kind of short sighted for the US myself, but hey i don't run things.
Well that seems to be as close as any one came to fixing that. 15% flat without loopholes period. I does eliminate a lot of government jobs and some accountants, but the well to do will still need an accountant because I would only propose taxing what someone gains. If they reinvest it some where else, then maybe no tax. It's still not as simple as it sounds. Determining what is and is not profit would keep some jobs. If you are gonna be a politician you have to be pragmatic and very good at double talk.
Whomever wins should keep things how they are come December. After that the only real issue I see is capital gains and some trusts. Instead of raising those rates, I propose to ease up the tax burden on everyone so that more people can work and make more money. Too much tax just makes things worse as far as revenue for the government goes because of the law of diminishing returns.
The debt ain't that bad either considering what kind of collateral the US has to back it up. Just add up what the US is worth and compare that to other countries. Our debt to value is not too bad as the US is probably worth $600 trillion at least although I haven't seen to many studies on the subject. Maybe we could put some unemployed accounts back to work to find that answer out.
The US is now doing OK but now the rest of the world is tanking and taking us with them.
I suggest you watch Moore's "Canadian Bacon".
With a thumb.
No holidays or honeymoons at Facebook HQ this summer, there is only one item on the agenda - Who is responsible for this mess? To find the answers, you will need a closer look at each VP's timeline in the run up to the IPO.
"Apart from a few fringe cases, I have never known anyone who was owed money to / was owed money by the Inland Revenue at the end of the year, so I guess the employers know exactly how much to deduct."
Um, you must've missed the news where when Inland Revenue switched to new computerised systems over the last few years, literally millions of people in the UK have been over/under taxed. I myself was over-taxed, which I'm not too fussed about as it's nice getting a big fat lump sum cheque through.
The system is theoretically simple, you have a tax code, and you get a deduction based on that. The problem is there are many many tax codes, and if you get things like private healthcare from your employer then this can affect your tax code.
I agree in general the UK's system is pretty good and is only getting better with the new systems where there is less scope for error - now anyone who works full time and doesn't do any other taxable work doesn't even have to be aware of the tax system, let alone fill any forms in. They just get told each month and a summary at the end of each tax year how much they paid in tax, but to date it's far from foolproof, whilst still better than most places it's absolutely false to say adjustments occur in only a few fringe cases. It's long been far more widespread than that.
That's correct. Sorry I wasn't more clear causing some confusion. As I re-read the original post I think I misunderstood what they were implying as well. But, you can't blame folks for getting a bit confused when talking taxes. :P