Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On November 12 2024 00:22 brian wrote: not sure why we’re even having this conversation still after this post. seems we should agree that it’s obviously bullshit right?
On November 11 2024 22:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
On November 11 2024 22:05 Gorsameth wrote: Imagine thinking Trump would actually pay Harris's campaign bills. No wonder you think Trump will be good for the US when your this gullible.
Gullible is expecting honesty from world leaders. World Leaders lie all the time. Many years ago Justin Trudeau promised Canada 2 billion trees to suck up megatonnes of carbon. Almost none have been planted.
or at a minimum why bother arguing a point where the person you’re arguing with can just throw up ‘yes but why bother trusting any of this?’ in the end. there’s no expectation of meaning what he says.
Good thing you caught that comment, I completely missed it. 90 million trees were promised after two years, not 2 billion (2 billion is the ultimate goal, not the first two years). 110 million trees were in fact planted, exceeding the initial goal by 22%. In other words that's 5.5% of the 2 billion goal, while the expected pace was 4.5%
Conclusion: JJR is once again spreading misinformation. What a surprise.
Thanks for taking the time to fact-check and dig up sources. I'm past taking Jimmy at his word, but I still do prefer having the actual info, so cheers
Trump has reaffirmed who he's making his Border Czar (not a position confirmed by the Senate):
Sunday's announcement was largely expected, as Trump had said over the summer that he would tap Homan to help oversee immigration policies in his potential second term. Speaking at the National Conservatism Conference in July, Homan told undocumented immigrants to "wait till 2025," adding, "If you're here illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder."
"Trump comes back in January," Homan said. "I'll be on his heels coming back. And I will run the biggest deportation operation this country's ever seen."
Homan was the face of the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration during his tenure as acting director of ICE from January 2017 to June 2018.
During that time, he often appeared at White House press briefings to defend his agents' arrests of undocumented immigrants and call for stronger enforcement, according to CNN, and applauded Trump for "taking the shackles off" ICE by allowing agents to make a broader range of arrests.
Notably, Homan was one of the architects behind its controversial family separation policy. More than 5,500 children of immigrants were separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018 under the administration's short-lived "Zero Tolerance" policy. According to the Department of Homeland Security, as of April, there were still 1,401 children without confirmed reunification.
Sunday's announcement was largely expected, as Trump had said over the summer that he would tap Homan to help oversee immigration policies in his potential second term. Speaking at the National Conservatism Conference in July, Homan told undocumented immigrants to "wait till 2025," adding, "If you're here illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder."
"Trump comes back in January," Homan said. "I'll be on his heels coming back. And I will run the biggest deportation operation this country's ever seen."
Homan was the face of the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration during his tenure as acting director of ICE from January 2017 to June 2018.
During that time, he often appeared at White House press briefings to defend his agents' arrests of undocumented immigrants and call for stronger enforcement, according to CNN, and applauded Trump for "taking the shackles off" ICE by allowing agents to make a broader range of arrests.
Notably, Homan was one of the architects behind its controversial family separation policy. More than 5,500 children of immigrants were separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018 under the administration's short-lived "Zero Tolerance" policy. According to the Department of Homeland Security, as of April, there were still 1,401 children without confirmed reunification.
This shouldn't surprise anyone. And still we whitewash it by calling it controversial instead of inhumane.
My faith in the Democrats to limit the damage inflicted on our country by people Trump specifically chose to inflict maximum damage is very low right now. I just get to watch 4 years of our country sinking even further.
On November 12 2024 06:12 GreenHorizons wrote: Trump has reaffirmed who he's making his Border Czar (not a position confirmed by the Senate):
Sunday's announcement was largely expected, as Trump had said over the summer that he would tap Homan to help oversee immigration policies in his potential second term. Speaking at the National Conservatism Conference in July, Homan told undocumented immigrants to "wait till 2025," adding, "If you're here illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder."
"Trump comes back in January," Homan said. "I'll be on his heels coming back. And I will run the biggest deportation operation this country's ever seen."
Homan was the face of the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration during his tenure as acting director of ICE from January 2017 to June 2018.
During that time, he often appeared at White House press briefings to defend his agents' arrests of undocumented immigrants and call for stronger enforcement, according to CNN, and applauded Trump for "taking the shackles off" ICE by allowing agents to make a broader range of arrests.
Notably, Homan was one of the architects behind its controversial family separation policy. More than 5,500 children of immigrants were separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018 under the administration's short-lived "Zero Tolerance" policy. According to the Department of Homeland Security, as of April, there were still 1,401 children without confirmed reunification.
This shouldn't surprise anyone. And still we whitewash it by calling it controversial instead of inhumane.
My faith in the Democrats to limit the damage inflicted on our country by people Trump specifically chose to inflict maximum damage is very low right now. I just get to watch 4 years of our country sinking even further.
Please join a socialist org instead. You have no certainty it will just be 4 years, even if Trump doesn't have more than 4 in him.
Immigrants will need people that are educated, organized and prepared to help them survive what will effectively be an ethnic cleansing campaign. We all know how useless Democrats are at opposing ethnic cleansing.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
Americans can choose not to pay tax in America. But they can't do so legally, so they'd better not set foot on US soil ever again if they do that. The IRS expects every American citizen and green card holder to pay tax to America. There's some exemptions, credits and reductions, but nothing that reaches the numbers that would make a dent in the amount "mega-rich" people would have to pay if taxed according to Elwood's suggestion.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
Americans can choose not to pay tax in America. But they can't do so legally, so they'd better not set foot on US soil ever again if they do that. The IRS expects every American citizen and green card holder to pay tax to America. There's some exemptions, credits and reductions, but nothing that reaches the numbers that would make a dent in the amount "mega-rich" people would have to pay if taxed according to Elwood's suggestion.
But yet, there’s not a huge amount of the US’ mega wealthy who actually live outside the US right?
OK I could be catastrophically wrong and look silly on this!
In the UK, it’s a pretty controversial thing, and most politically engaged folks, especially on the left could name you a whole bunch of tax exiles from memory.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
Americans can choose not to pay tax in America. But they can't do so legally, so they'd better not set foot on US soil ever again if they do that. The IRS expects every American citizen and green card holder to pay tax to America. There's some exemptions, credits and reductions, but nothing that reaches the numbers that would make a dent in the amount "mega-rich" people would have to pay if taxed according to Elwood's suggestion.
But yet, there’s not a huge amount of the US’ mega wealthy who actually live outside the US right?
OK I could be catastrophically wrong and look silly on this!
In the UK, it’s a pretty controversial thing, and most politically engaged folks, especially on the left could name you a whole bunch of tax exiles from memory.
Doubt there are, but this all started because slydie's answer to "look, we should just tax the mega-wealthy" was that they'd just move away and avoid the taxes. That'll work in most countries, but not the US.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
Americans can choose not to pay tax in America. But they can't do so legally, so they'd better not set foot on US soil ever again if they do that. The IRS expects every American citizen and green card holder to pay tax to America. There's some exemptions, credits and reductions, but nothing that reaches the numbers that would make a dent in the amount "mega-rich" people would have to pay if taxed according to Elwood's suggestion.
But yet, there’s not a huge amount of the US’ mega wealthy who actually live outside the US right?
OK I could be catastrophically wrong and look silly on this!
In the UK, it’s a pretty controversial thing, and most politically engaged folks, especially on the left could name you a whole bunch of tax exiles from memory.
Doubt there are, but this all started because slydie's answer to "look, we should just tax the mega-wealthy" was that they'd just move away and avoid the taxes. That'll work in most countries, but not the US.
I learned something today. I’ll need to further read up on the details, but in the face of it the US actually has a policy better than most of the world that kinda works, to my understanding? :O
I think people also forget that the mega wealthy are also people. They like to do things.
Be a bit less wealthy but live in a culture you’re familiar with, with all the social connections you have, or move elsewhere to be a little richer?
Some will absolutely take the second trade of course, but the former will also keep some staying put regardless of your tax regime
In the case of the UK, I’d make policy to do at least the following. 1) You can pay UK tax at UK rates 2) If you don’t want to do that, you can’t make donations to political parties, nor own UK news media outlets
Pick one. Obviously there’s some added complexity and rigour needed, but at a basic spirit level.
It’s a sorta sickening 1-2 punch. I’m not sure how it is elsewhere but in the UK specifically. Some of our biggest newspapers are owned by tax exiles (or ‘non-domiciles’ as friendly media calls them). Some of the biggest individual political donators in multiple cycles have been the same.
So you don’t want to pay your tax, you fuck off from the country but you also want to use your money to influence the politics of the country you voluntarily fucked off from? No, fuck off. Nonsense
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
Sounds like the US tax code is very deliberate with who it allows to avoid paying taxes.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
That is fascinating. For example UK/Poland situation you get tax residency in the place you live/work and pay taxes there, with some caveats (eg. if you have income in Poland then you have to pay tax in Poland based on total earnings - tax you paid in UK, which due to currency difference means usually that you hitting higher threshold)
How does that work if US citizen dont change nationality, but work for few years in some country with really low wages, do you have to then pay tax in both countries?
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
That is fascinating. For example UK/Poland situation you get tax residency in the place you live/work and pay taxes there, with some caveats (eg. if you have income in Poland then you have to pay tax in Poland based on total earnings - tax you paid in UK, which due to currency difference means usually that you hitting higher threshold)
How does that work if US citizen dont change nationality, but work for few years in some country with really low wages, do you have to then pay tax in both countries?
If you’re resident and working in another country you still have to file an annual US tax return but there’s a decent sized exclusion (enough for a manager’s income, not enough for someone earning millions) and you can also count taxes paid in that country against the US liability. So let’s say taxable income (post exclusion) is $100k. That country has a 20% tax, US has 25%. US will expect you to pay $25k in income tax total but will recognize you already paid someone $20k and will only ask for $5k more.
If you’re somewhere with really low wages you’d be under the exclusion. The US wields a bigger stick than most and so they have the power to implement a truly global tax policy. The problem is enforcement because the staffing of the IRS has been politicized. That shifts the liability to those least able to cheat the system, the working class.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
That is fascinating. For example UK/Poland situation you get tax residency in the place you live/work and pay taxes there, with some caveats (eg. if you have income in Poland then you have to pay tax in Poland based on total earnings - tax you paid in UK, which due to currency difference means usually that you hitting higher threshold)
How does that work if US citizen dont change nationality, but work for few years in some country with really low wages, do you have to then pay tax in both countries?
If you’re resident and working in another country you still have to file an annual US tax return but there’s a decent sized exclusion (enough for a manager’s income, not enough for someone earning millions) and you can also count taxes paid in that country against the US liability. So let’s say taxable income (post exclusion) is $100k. That country has a 20% tax, US has 25%. US will expect you to pay $25k in income tax total but will recognize you already paid someone $20k and will only ask for $5k more.
If you’re somewhere with really low wages you’d be under the exclusion. The US wields a bigger stick than most and so they have the power to implement a truly global tax policy. The problem is enforcement because the staffing of the IRS has been politicized. That shifts the liability to those least able to cheat the system, the working class.
Thanks for this explanation thats really interesting.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
That is fascinating. For example UK/Poland situation you get tax residency in the place you live/work and pay taxes there, with some caveats (eg. if you have income in Poland then you have to pay tax in Poland based on total earnings - tax you paid in UK, which due to currency difference means usually that you hitting higher threshold)
How does that work if US citizen dont change nationality, but work for few years in some country with really low wages, do you have to then pay tax in both countries?
If you’re resident and working in another country you still have to file an annual US tax return but there’s a decent sized exclusion (enough for a manager’s income, not enough for someone earning millions) and you can also count taxes paid in that country against the US liability. So let’s say taxable income (post exclusion) is $100k. That country has a 20% tax, US has 25%. US will expect you to pay $25k in income tax total but will recognize you already paid someone $20k and will only ask for $5k more.
If you’re somewhere with really low wages you’d be under the exclusion. The US wields a bigger stick than most and so they have the power to implement a truly global tax policy. The problem is enforcement because the staffing of the IRS has been politicized. That shifts the liability to those least able to cheat the system, the working class.
Seems to be a domain you’re more au fait with.
I’m personally OK with tax as per the social contract, but even hypothetically I cannot, as a salaried worker figure out any way to dodge it, and I’m quite imaginative.
Folks who can do, unless they’re bleeding heart types, will often do.
I’m looking for numbers right now, apparently I’m not sticking the right terms in, so I’m getting a lot of unrelated stuff.
What does the bang for your IRS buck look like?
I’m trying to figure it out, I assume it’s flat to a point, it’s basic admin and you get to a point where extra funding lets you actually tackle the shirkers, and past that point you claim back a lot more than your do expenditure is
That's actually ridiculous. Like, we just had an election and it did take a week to determine the final result just because everything was so close and was depending on two ridings within 50 votes. But it wasn't the initial count but because there was built in four delay before they started counting the mail in and the recounts on really close ridings. But one week for just the normal vote count?
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
That is fascinating. For example UK/Poland situation you get tax residency in the place you live/work and pay taxes there, with some caveats (eg. if you have income in Poland then you have to pay tax in Poland based on total earnings - tax you paid in UK, which due to currency difference means usually that you hitting higher threshold)
How does that work if US citizen dont change nationality, but work for few years in some country with really low wages, do you have to then pay tax in both countries?
If you’re resident and working in another country you still have to file an annual US tax return but there’s a decent sized exclusion (enough for a manager’s income, not enough for someone earning millions) and you can also count taxes paid in that country against the US liability. So let’s say taxable income (post exclusion) is $100k. That country has a 20% tax, US has 25%. US will expect you to pay $25k in income tax total but will recognize you already paid someone $20k and will only ask for $5k more.
If you’re somewhere with really low wages you’d be under the exclusion. The US wields a bigger stick than most and so they have the power to implement a truly global tax policy. The problem is enforcement because the staffing of the IRS has been politicized. That shifts the liability to those least able to cheat the system, the working class.
Except for the exemption cap, everything else is a standard foreign tax credit method.
Portuguese taxpayers are taxed on their worldwide income but as an almost standard functionality of tax systems, they get foreign tax credit.
On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote: Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras:
Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes.
Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property.
I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only.
If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
You have to change nationality but they charge you an up front tax on unrecognized taxable income to do that to avoid people dodging taxes.
That is fascinating. For example UK/Poland situation you get tax residency in the place you live/work and pay taxes there, with some caveats (eg. if you have income in Poland then you have to pay tax in Poland based on total earnings - tax you paid in UK, which due to currency difference means usually that you hitting higher threshold)
How does that work if US citizen dont change nationality, but work for few years in some country with really low wages, do you have to then pay tax in both countries?
If you’re resident and working in another country you still have to file an annual US tax return but there’s a decent sized exclusion (enough for a manager’s income, not enough for someone earning millions) and you can also count taxes paid in that country against the US liability. So let’s say taxable income (post exclusion) is $100k. That country has a 20% tax, US has 25%. US will expect you to pay $25k in income tax total but will recognize you already paid someone $20k and will only ask for $5k more.
If you’re somewhere with really low wages you’d be under the exclusion. The US wields a bigger stick than most and so they have the power to implement a truly global tax policy. The problem is enforcement because the staffing of the IRS has been politicized. That shifts the liability to those least able to cheat the system, the working class.
Except for the exemption cap, everything else is a standard foreign tax credit method.
Portuguese taxpayers are taxed on their worldwide income but as an almost standard functionality of tax systems, they get foreign tax credit.
Portuguese taxpayers don't get taxed on their income at all by Portugal if they cease to be a tax resident in Portugal. As a Dutch citizen having lived and worked in both Brazil and Spain, I can tell you for certain that I did not have to declare taxes in the Netherlands. I did have to declare taxes in Brazil and now Spain. I have to declare taxes over my Spanish income as well as my Dutch one, and that is sometimes good, sometimes bad. In general taxes in Spain are lower than in the Netherlands, but sometimes I miss out on perks. My parents wanted to give me some money because gifts up to a certain amount are tax exempt in the Netherlands. I had to tell them that was pointless, because the Spanish tax law does not have that provision, and I would be taxed more for a gift like this than if they keep it, invest it and I inherit it years down the line. My American friends, both here in Spain and in Brazil, on the other hand, need to declare taxes twice, once in their country of residence and once in the USA. In Brazil, this often resulted in them paying double. More absurd still, my German friend had to declare taxes in the USA, because he had been the recipient of a green card, and wanted to remain eligibile for its possible renewal in the future, despite not residing in the US (and obviously his green card having expired years before).
EPT
![[image loading]](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/01/PSDT_01.10.20_economic-inequality_1-4.png)
