Yet you quoting them make them true? I am not trying to refute them, but have yet to see your evidence. It is your claim and thus you need to validate that claim. However, let me take a stab at it - since you claim that I have. ===== Per your first statement: "that potential net profits are higher in the 1st world major economies" which you have not (to my knowledge) posted any facts to that claim. My argument would be simply that potential net profit is HIGHER for countries that are NOT 1st world. Why, simply because we know that costs (labor, healthcare, taxes, and other tariffs) are LESS in emerging markets. That fact is reflected in the massive move by U.S. and Western corporations that have moved both manufacturing and sevices to these nations. For if "net profits" were greater in 1st world, as you claim, there would NEVER be a reason to move business out of those 1st world countries. My argument is based on the exodus that we have seen for a couple of decades. I am sure simple math will bare that out. Remember, "net profits" are in simple terms the difference between revenue and costs. Emerging markets have lower costs (taxes, labor, healthcare, etc.) I think we would all agree on that. ========= Per your second point, "Or that tax havens are generally less free societies than places like the USA, Canada, Australasia and Western Europe?" My argument is that most tax havens are in Europe, with a few outside of that arena. Many of them (Switzerland, Singapore, Monaco, and others) have consitantly rated the highest in the Economist ranking of "free societies". Actually, based on the Economist, the U.S. was further down than most people think. When I have the time I will look through my copies and post that information for you - it is freely available on the internet - but as time permits - abet my rapid response - I will find them. ==== Per your last comment, "Or that tax havens have less rich residents than the world's major economies." You need to clearly define tax haven nations vs. major economies. Also at what level do you define "rich". In your first statement you qualify "first world" but now you are comparing to "major economies". You are now curb fitting to make your point, without definitions or backing those claims. Would China be a "major economy" or "1st world"? So it is hard to confirm or refute your claims since they are clumsy and not clear. However, I will take a jab - if you are referring to tax havens (Hong Kong, Switzerland, Monaco, Andora, etc.) I would argue that the mean income is significantly higher than the "USA, Canada, Australasia and Western Europe" (which you had earlier defined.) That should be proof enough that the scale of wealth is higher on a per portion basis. ---------------------------------------- That is a good question and I don't know the answer. As per information that I have read, over 5 million U.S. citizens live abroad of which 2,000 per year expatriate (give up their citizenship). Certainly it is not much as by these numbers. The data, which I don't have and would find more interesting, is the net income value of those that do expatriate. This is for the U.S. only - however England and others reports an similar increase in expatriates. As per using specific examples like Templeton or Soros - these are circumstantial (meaning that you have someone move to this nation and get citizenship - like Soros - because of political/historical reasons). As per Templeton - who knows why he said it and why he has NOT come back. The point is that we have a net out flow of wealthy people, be it 10 or 2,000 per year and not a net inflow of wealthy people. Congress felt it was a big enough impact on taxable income to draft legislation in 1996 and again in 2008 to address what they feel is a rather large amount of income. I grant you that some may regret it and others not. I don't want to go case-by-case. I have a very good friend that is a Cayman "status", ex-US - they are very happy have been there over 15 years, travel to the U.S., own a home in the U.S. I know of two others that gave up their citizenship in 2008 after Obama came to office, they have both been living in Switzerland for over a decade. They are happy too. Will they regret it, who knows - they have made their decisions can travel the world, move where they want to, and have their quality of life they are satisfied with. Lastly, there are those like Soros and Murdock that are ideologues of epic porportions (from different sides of the political spectrum) - it isn't about taxes it is about ideological differences that drive their agenda. However, as per ANYONE at some point taxes become a determining factor as to moving or staying. What is too much, can only be determined by each individual. Eventually at some level a ground swell will rise and say "enough is enough" - how much that is - I have no f'n idea. I know my number and that is all that matters. Correct?
You must be in a sh#thole to make some blanket claim. I have lived in Japan for over 4 years. I live in various places in Europe as well. Served in the Arm Forces as well. I have also spent months in Central America and the Middle East. Yeah - there are places with no roads that are crap holes, but there are many places with roads and a quality of life well beyond what you make it sound like. I can find crack hole places in the states where Police man could give a rat's hole what happens to you. In fact lots of them. I just hate when people make ideologue blanket statements that have little bearing in fact. You make is sound like the entire world has NO ROADS and is a hell hole compared to the U.S. It is idiotic statements like that and generalizations that breed bigotry and ignorance.
Actually I live in the second best city of the world as far as quality of life goes (according to the biggest independant study on the topic). But that's not the point. The point is you get what you pay for. And when you live in the USA you might pay 35% but you get a lot for it compared to most other countries. It isn't just about roads and bribes. For instance, you better pray you won't have a medical emergency in a big indian city. By the time the ambulance arrives you're most likely dead already. The one I needed took more than 6 hours to arrive... I was living in India as expat at the time. My home land came with a plane and a medical team to bring me back. The cost for this was $100k+. But as a citizen of that country it was free for me. Free. Tell me where I can get this kind of service without paying high taxes? Ninna
It's not just 35%, you need to added in all the other taxes as well. State, Property, Fed, Sales, Estate, Social Security, unemployment, etc. I lived in Kobe and there was NO PROBLEM with quick medical services. I split my lip WIDE open and had no problems with getting to the hospital quickly and with excellent care. The same is true in the states. I have a friend that lives very far off in Montana, if he gets sick and needed an ambulance it would take HOURS for them to get to him. Is that fair? Certainly different countries and even within those countries care, roads, services, will vary and dramatically. There are VAST differences living in Detroit vs. living in Beverly Hills. Or Miami vs. Adak, Alaska. I spent time in South Korea and that is vastly different than Japan. Even over time things change. I was in Shanghai in the late 1970s - compared to then - it is VASTLY different. There are cities in other countries that offer better quality of life than cities in the U.S. and yes taxes, services, and what you get are vastly different. The U.S. is bankrupt, if not for the ability of the Fed to print money. States are facing bankruptcy (California issued IOUs last year because they couldn't pay). So it is less about taxes and more about a government's ability to manage it's budget and the services those taxes SHOULD pay for. I am NOT opposed to taxes and that is not WHY I orginially posted to this thread. However, it always seems that ideology trumps objective discussions and then everything goes downhill and into a flame war. Which I hope to avoid. Again - sorry for my very blunt replies and I certainly don't like ad hominem attacks (which I am guilty of). Please accept my apology - I was fired up about something in the office and your post was my "straw" - if you get my meaning. regards...
Gentlemen, Dare I say, this may be one of the most constructive debates I have seen on ET in AGES (and I have been lurking for a long time). Perhaps an interesting subtopic would be, why? At any rate, I appreciate everyone's contribution (not just the people who seem to be in my general camp on this topic). Cutten brings up Templeton's statement about regretting expatriation, and I also brought this up very early on in the debate. Unfortunately Templeton is no longer with us, and I haven't been able to find any reference-able material about exactly why he had regrets. I know for a fact there is an interview somewhere where he does simply mention it was a regrettable decision. One can only assume he had extended family/community, and perhaps other sentimentalities that we would all have on some level. There is also a very negative stigma not only cast on you as an individual here, but on your immediate relatives should you be expatriating for financial reasons. If it is a high profile enough case, I would say it can almost be a vilification. This makes perfect sense, most of the population simply can not relate. I suggest proceeding with discretion in such things. I think another interesting aspect to this whole debate, is how a broad income+capital gains tax creates a barrier to entry for competing with a societies wealthy class. Once you reach a certain "terminal wealth" if you will, high taxation should be welcomed with open arms and heavily promoted, perhaps with the exception of a "wealth" tax or inheritance tax. We see this now with many high profile multi-multi-billionaires whining about how they aren't taxed enough. To me this is perhaps the most outrageous thing I have witnessed in this country in terms of this general topic. It is open class warfare (in reverse of the tradition) and I will explain why: Because these men have all the opportunity in the world to write the treasury whatever size check they want to (may I suggest, every last dime of your net worth Mr. Buffet and Mr. Gates?). Instead they plea for a policy change which on a relative basis will do nothing to them, but will seriously crimp anyone's chances of completely dethroning them.
I've twice lived in London -- a city I like a great deal -- each time for under a year. And while I enjoyed my stay both times it was good to get back to NYC. I can't imagine that living in a backwater would be enjoyable just because you had more money.
The grey or dark areas of the US Tax Code are the most fruitful part of the Code. These are the sections you want to be operating in. Make your business as complicated as possible so even the appeals division of the IRS can't understand it. You'll get some very favorable rulings if you can pull this off. Once you get past the 1040 the tax code becomes very nebulous and a bit of creativity can go a long way.
Don't forget the cost of living. Switzerland and Monaco are just great places to live with a lot to do but check out the real estate prices for example. One of my best friends lives in one of the crappiest studio in Geneva. I wouldn't stay there more than a month. 1800 CHF/per month. Last week, I joined him and an other friend at a regular restaurant. 170 CHF for 2 people... If you want to really laugh( or perhaps not), check out the square foot price in Monaco. :eek:
If your yearly income is in the seven figure range, it doesn't really matter whether a Wiener Schnitzel costs 100 CHF or whether property is expensive. It's all about percentages, i.e. taxes, then. Still, I wouldn't want to waste my time living in Switzerland or Monacco....boring as hell.
..........Still, I wouldn't want to waste my time living in Switzerland or Monacco....boring as hell.......... true but you don`t get it. You do not actually have to live in that country.To have a tax status is one thing to live and move around another. We traders need laptops and connectivity. I can get that anywhere and I am loving it especially with saving 6 figures every year........it is all about percentages.