dreamdancer 0 #1 July 21, 2010 lots of money here to pay off the deficit... QuoteIn the U.S., thanks in part to overseas tax havens, we have one tax system for multinational companies and wealthy individuals –and another for small businesses and ordinary taxpayers. Tax havens enable the rich and U.S. multinationals to move income and assets between global subsidiaries and dodge taxes. Responsible businesses and individual taxpayers are left to pay for U.S. infrastructure, defense, education and all the public investments that contribute to a healthy business climate and economy. How does this work? A U.S. company creates a subsidiary in a secretive low tax haven such as the Luxemburg, Bermuda or the Republic of Mauritius. In the Grand Cayman Islands, one building called Ugland House, houses over 19,000 of these corporate subsidiaries. These corporations moving assets and income between these subsidiaries so that profits appear to be generated overseas while losses are deducted from U.S. taxes. Because of the lack of transparency it is difficult to assess just how much money is loss, but estimates range from $43 billion to $123 billion per year for both individual and corporate tax avoidance. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/20-12stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,426 #2 July 21, 2010 So what's the solution to this problem? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #3 July 21, 2010 Tax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities you hate. But imagine if drugs dealers paid taxes on their earnings. Imagine if handyman contractors paid taxes on their earnings instead of engaging in their underground economy. If you are going to go after tax evaders, you need to go after everyone, not just the demographic you despise. Of course one can argue the solution would be to eliminate income and capital gains taxes and replace them with higher consumption taxes. But I am not convinced this will solve the problem. More people will just be driven to the underground economy. I don't blame people for being driven to the underground economy, since governments of all shapes and sizes give us pathetic services for our tax dollars. But it is rather laughable listening to people whine that the nanny state is not taking care of their every need while some of these very same people evade paying taxes. Rich, poor, young and old ... there is no shortage of tax evaders. They come in all shapes and sizes. But it is so much easier to start threads about the evil rich corporate entities and how life would be so much better if there were no rich people. How is your day coming comrade? I am afraid this isn't the line for food. It is the line for shoes. The line for food starts over there. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #4 July 21, 2010 Quote Tax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities you hate. But imagine if drugs dealers paid taxes on their earnings. Imagine if handyman contractors paid taxes on their earnings instead of engaging in their underground economy. If you are going to go after tax evaders, you need to go after everyone, not just the demographic you despise. Of course one can argue the solution would be to eliminate income and capital gains taxes and replace them with higher consumption taxes. But I am not convinced this will solve the problem. More people will just be driven to the underground economy. I don't blame people for being driven to the underground economy, since governments of all shapes and sizes give us pathetic services for our tax dollars. But it is rather laughable listening to people whine that the nanny state is not taking care of their every need while some of these very same people evade paying taxes. Rich, poor, young and old ... there is no shortage of tax evaders. They come in all shapes and sizes. But it is so much easier to start threads about the evil rich corporate entities and how life would be so much better if there were no rich people. How is your day coming comrade? I am afraid this isn't the line for food. It is the line for shoes. The line for food starts over there. is that the line you've just left stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,646 #5 July 21, 2010 QuoteTax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #6 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteTax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit. Targetting? No. Including in a larger plan that goes after all tax evaders does make sense as it shows consistency.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,646 #7 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteTax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit. Targetting? No. Including in a larger plan that goes after all tax evaders does make sense as it shows consistency. It is inefficient to spend more in resources than the return you get. The purpose is to raise revenue. They SHOULD target those likely to owe the most.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #8 July 21, 2010 The amount of money that governments spend dwarfs what the tax evaders fail to pay. The USA (and other governments around the world) have spending issues not revenue issues. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,646 #9 July 21, 2010 QuoteThe amount of money that governments spend dwarfs what the tax evaders fail to pay.. www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15111003 I wouldn't say that 14% of what is owed is insignificant. In most recent years that missing $345BILLION (2007 dollars) would have resulted in a surplus instead of a deficit.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #10 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit. Targetting? No. Including in a larger plan that goes after all tax evaders does make sense as it shows consistency. It is inefficient to spend more in resources than the return you get. The purpose is to raise revenue. They SHOULD target those likely to owe the most. And then they move overseas and become citizens/corporations of another country, hence losing the revenue source. Sounds like a plan to me.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #11 July 21, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Tax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit. Targetting? No. Including in a larger plan that goes after all tax evaders does make sense as it shows consistency. It is inefficient to spend more in resources than the return you get. The purpose is to raise revenue. They SHOULD target those likely to owe the most. And then they move overseas and become citizens/corporations of another country, hence losing the revenue source. Sounds like a plan to me. Don't foget jobs Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,646 #12 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit. Targetting? No. Including in a larger plan that goes after all tax evaders does make sense as it shows consistency. It is inefficient to spend more in resources than the return you get. The purpose is to raise revenue. They SHOULD target those likely to owe the most. And then they move overseas and become citizens/corporations of another country, hence losing the revenue source. Sounds like a plan to me. So you support tax evasion by the wealthy, but not by the middle class.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #13 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteTax evasion occurs in many more areas than you think. Of course you target corporations and the rich because these are people/entities THAT HAVE THE MOST TO SHELTER. Targeting DZ packers for unreported income isn't going to make much of a dent in the deficit. Targetting? No. Including in a larger plan that goes after all tax evaders does make sense as it shows consistency. It is inefficient to spend more in resources than the return you get. The purpose is to raise revenue. They SHOULD target those likely to owe the most. And then they move overseas and become citizens/corporations of another country, hence losing the revenue source. Sounds like a plan to me. So you support tax evasion by the wealthy, but not by the middle class. Show where I said that. Maybe you can also show the law that would make a company guilty of tax evasion just by moving out of country, thanks.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #14 July 21, 2010 QuoteI wouldn't say that 14% of what is owed is insignificant. In most recent years that missing $345BILLION (2007 dollars) would have resulted in a surplus instead of a deficit. The amount mentioned in the article is not attributed to any specific reliable source and as such can't be used to establish significance. QuoteThe government believes if everyone paid what they owed, the IRS would collect $345 billion more For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #15 July 21, 2010 QuoteIt is inefficient to spend more in resources than the return you get. Agree. So you are against welfare and food stamps too?Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,146 #16 July 21, 2010 For that matter, I don't think the army earns us much, either. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #17 July 21, 2010 QuoteThe report points out that tax havens contributed to the global economic meltdown by permitting companies to hide risky investments and behavior. Scratch the surface behind the most shady dealings of the last decade and you’ll find an overseas tax haven. In a special investigative series, McClatchy News documented how Goldman Sachs, working through Cayman Island subsidiaries, “peddled billions of dollars in shaky securities tied to subprime mortgages on unsuspecting pension funds, insurance companies and other investors when it concluded that the housing bubble would burst.” TransOcean, owner of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform that exploded, killed 11 workers, and led to a devastating oil disaster in Gulf of Mexico, is itself an overseas tax haven. In 1999, TransOcean moved its incorporation from the United States to the Cayman Islands and then later to Switzerland, with the stated purpose of lowering its taxes. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/20-12stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DARK 0 #18 July 21, 2010 QuoteSo what's the solution to this problem? invade the countries obviously and destroy them Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #19 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteSo what's the solution to this problem? invade the countries obviously and destroy them that's a bit harsh, maybe just tasering them gotta taze someone ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DARK 0 #20 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo what's the solution to this problem? invade the countries obviously and destroy them that's a bit harsh, maybe just tasering them gotta taze someone you can tase ireland cause obama thinks its a tax haven when it clearly isnt but you might aswell nuke the others cause well.....cause.....i dont live there Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #21 July 21, 2010 Quote So what's the solution to this problem? i propose a specially designed virus to hack into the bank accounts of these tax havens - and erase them stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #22 July 21, 2010 Quote Quote So what's the solution to this problem? i propose a specially designed virus to hack into the bank accounts of these tax havens - and erase them Thus getting rid of the very money that you claim is the government's property - makes about as much sense as most of your 'claims'.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,646 #23 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't say that 14% of what is owed is insignificant. In most recent years that missing $345BILLION (2007 dollars) would have resulted in a surplus instead of a deficit. The amount mentioned in the article is not attributed to any specific reliable source and as such can't be used to establish significance. QuoteThe government believes if everyone paid what they owed, the IRS would collect $345 billion more So the IRS isn't a reliable source on tax revenue matters. What have you been smoking?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,426 #24 July 21, 2010 >i propose a specially designed virus to hack into the bank accounts >of these tax havens - and erase them Eh, that's not as much fun as just killing them all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #25 July 21, 2010 Quote Quote Quote So what's the solution to this problem? i propose a specially designed virus to hack into the bank accounts of these tax havens - and erase them Thus getting rid of the very money that you claim is the government's property - makes about as much sense as most of your 'claims'. if they want their money back - they just have to prove it was in their accounts (meanwhile we just print more money to replace that lost - easypeasy)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
