The real threat to Singapore is an internal coup. The prime minister and other officials are not guarded by Singapore citizens, they are guarded by Nepal gurkhas.
Even without any special investor visa he can come and go for 90 days at a time on visa waiver. He just has to leave and reenter every 90 days. What he has to be careful of is staying for more than 4 months and becoming taxed as a resident alien. I think you are kidding yourself a bit if you think a guy worth billions isnt going to be allowed to come and go as he pleases. This guy probably spends more on advisors than most people make. Renouncing will not cause him the slightest discomfort. Singapore would thrash Malaysia, they would go scorched earth. Singapore takes its defense very seriously, they have worked extensively with the Israelis because they share the common problems of defending a tiny nation. Their pilots train here in the US, they deploy the army in various hostile environments. They are ready to rock and roll. The biggest problem I have with their plan is that while every male does service and is trained, firearm ownership is forbidden. So it doesnt do much good to have a trained militia force if they dont have guns.
I'm more concerned about our federal reserve bailing out european banks than this guy leaving with a couple billion.
I think you're underestimating how little the USCIS cares who you are. Renunciation is not a joke. You WILL NOT come and go as you please after handing in your passport. This is from ycombinator: "A person who renounces U.S. citizenship is generally not able to take advantage of the special visa programs (like the EB5 investor program) to regain residency. Furthermore, their applications for visas, etc., are also (informally) put in the lowest-priority bracket unless they pony up to be placed in the priority queue. Moreover, any attempt to renounce their renunciation of citizenship results in a hefty tax bill for the period they were not a citizen, as the initial renunciation will be treated (by the IRS) as an attempt to evade taxation. Indeed, merely returning to the U.S. for a period of more than 183 days (one of the tests for residence for taxation purposes) could trigger this result." This is not about taxes at all. It is about never living in the US again. You don't renounce citizenship unless you never plan to live in the US again.
What is so hard for him to leave every 90 days if His primary residence is in Singapore. He will be able to fly in and out as he pleases... You don't think the Republic of Singapore will cover his back? As far as I'm concerned He'll be cash rich and free'r than any of us tax slaves. Good Luck to him... Do you realize how ay ex-pats are living off of their social security checks in foreign lands? How is this really different?
He's prohibited from living in the US more than 183 days/year. In other words, he's prohibited from living in the US like any ordinary citizen. Funny thing, he isn't one.
Giving up US citizenship because of taxes, of all things, is just insane. No other word for it. A US passport is a precious thing to have when traveling. Not something you give up merely to maximize your profits from a windfall.
In business, think business first. rest is just BS. If any of you want to pay more tax, all you have to do is sending money to US treasury, pay down some of national debts.
It's very different, the ex-pats are still US citizens but are also usually permanent residents of the countries they live in, they can return to the US at any time permanently. That's the issue here. If getting out from under the IRS' thumb is the idea the expat route is a good way to go imo, you have assets like a home and bank accounts that the IRS cannot unilaterally seize or put liens against like in the US and you are dealing with a remote office in an embassy or consulate that has no where near the resources or powers they do back in the states. On the other hand, you're also dealing with a foreign, often third world local government now too.
Heck, if I had a couple of billion, I would have a hard time spending 90 days in the US. I might want to be in the US twice in a year, about 30 days max each time. I would Summer in Bermuda right next to the homes of Bloomberg, Ross Perot, and Silvio Berlusconi. I would spend the Winter in Bali, Fiji, with some trips to Australia in case I miss Western culture and native English speakers. I would be hard pressed to spend much time in the US. Maybe I would visit Manhattan in May for some theater or arts, but I suppose I would be just as happy to visit Tokyo to get some really good sushi. The only other time I might want to visit the US is for Thanksgiving or Christmas with family or close friends. I don't know why I would have a deep desire to be in the US. Skiing in Aspen? Why would I do that when I can ski the Alps? Visiting some wineries in Napa? Hell, I can get better private wine tastings in Burgundy, and the bread and cheese accompaniments will be better. Even if I wanted to visit Aspen or Napa, I could do so because I simply would never have the desire to spend more than a week skiing or visiting vineyards. Anyone who thinks being restricted to 90 days visits in the US is some sort of handicap simply cannot think like a billionaire. If I were a billionaire, I would have a hard time racking up 90 days total in a year. Even if I was an investor in a Silicon Valley start-up, I couldn't spend that much time in the US. What billionaire wants to spend any time in Silicon Valley? That's purely a fly-in, fly-out location... I would be an investor, not the manager who is going to spend weeks with geeky Indian and Chinese programmers to get code completed. Sorry, some of you guys can't even imagine what options you would have if you had a few billion.