Live data from Hacker News

Second Canadian 'missing' in China

bbc.com

111–117 of 117 posts

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#111
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the 'advisory' would be: don't break laws. Whose laws? Why should the Swiss follow US laws? What if the US establishes arbitrary laws? Should the Swiss still follow those laws?

Money laundering and tax evasion are not 'arbitrary' laws.

> Money laundering and tax evasion are not 'arbitrary' laws.

Please define tax evasion. If country X's government legally authorizes a tax provision like mortgage deduction for tax reduction or tax-free interest or tax breaks for S-corps or tax reduction for exported payments, are these all tax evasion?

When people talk about companies evading taxes, they're really working through the tax code. Some countries have positive balance sheets and very little debt. They can afford to give companies tax breaks.

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#112
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money laundering and tax evasion are not 'arbitrary' laws.

> Money laundering and tax evasion are not 'arbitrary' laws. Please define tax evasion. If country X's government legally authorizes a tax provision like mortgage deduction for tax reduction or tax-free interest or tax breaks for S-corps or tax reduction for exported payments, are these all tax evasion? When people talk about companies evading taxes, they're really working through the tax code. Some countries have po…

Tax evasion is simple: people not paying the taxes they are owed to the government. What you are referring to is tax avoidance or minimization, which is fine (or rather, another problem, mostly the governments)

"When people talk about companies evading taxes, they're really working through the tax code."

Switzerland facilitates tons of actual tax evasion, which they are not supposed to do, and which is illegal in the US.

From [1] "the Swiss financial sector and the DoJ began a decade ago when whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld provided evidence that his former employer, UBS, was helping wealthy Americans evade taxes.

Switzerland’s largest bank was fined $780 million in 2009, but it was later discovered that other Swiss banks had been poaching UBS clients after the criminal probe had been announced. "

Switzerland is party to many treaties with EU, US etc. - and they (gov. and banks) know exactly that they cannot facilitate tax evasion, if so, it becomes a crime.

This is not ambiguous.

If you, living in Switzerland, help facilitate a crime such as murder (i.e. totally unambiguous) in the US, then the US will extradite you even though you may not have broken any Swiss laws.

Tax evasion is a crime like any other, hence extradition and arrests etc..

Though some cases may have some ambiguity i.e. (what constitutes 'aid' and maybe some hairline differences between 'evasion' and 'avoidance') - in general, it's crystal clear: if you help people with tax evasion, you've committed a crime.

And FYI - the reciprocal works just the same - if you murder someone in Switzerland, but have not broken and US laws, you can be sure that the Americans will arrest you and send you to Switzerland if that's what the Swiss authorities want.

[1] https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/-5-million-fine_swiss-bank-sett...

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#113
post #105
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the 'advisory' would be: don't break laws. Whose laws? Why should the Swiss follow US laws? What if the US establishes arbitrary laws? Should the Swiss still follow those laws?

But that's the point, no? Swiss have their own laws (hiding assets), US have their own laws (arresting people who hide assets), seems perfectly fair. Personally, I wish no developed (e.g. EU, US) country would allow any economic relationship with any country that allows tax avoidance (like 0% tax) or tax evasion (like bank secrecy).

Tax avoidance is fine. That's for the government to sort out.

As for " Swiss have their own laws (hiding assets)," - not really.

UBS et. al. are not supposed to be helping Americans evade paying taxes - by their own law.

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#114

China is making themselves look horrible here. Ms. Meng has a proper reason for being arrested (the allegations are that she committed fraud to bypass US sanctions against Iran and sell them US tech by lying about HuaWei and SkyComs involvement to HSBC). There will be a trial, this investigation has been happening for years, and it is by the Justice Department, not a request from Trump (who seems to have been caught…

They are not random.

At very least, they are political actors, which is a dangerous job in China. Presumably they have been under watch by the Chinese government for a some time, and only now they decide to arrest them.

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#115
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of this 'How China Works' is new to anyone. Canada should have considered it when deciding to get involved. While the majority of US Federal prosecutions are honest, FBI agents and US attorneys do get involved in misapplication of the law and reckless prosecution for political or personal reasons. And our president respecting rule of law or being better than Xi on any measure except successful criminal behavior…

> None of this 'How China Works' is new to anyone. Canada should have considered it when deciding to get involved. Maybe on HN, but is this really old news to all of our governments? I was watching CBC last night on all the issues the Canadian government is now running into with their 5g rollout since they were one of the few western countries who decided to deal with china. Either they didn't know what china was, or…

Nobody sane ever expected China to be a 'rule of law' country in the Western sense though. I don't know enough about Chinese law to judge whether changing a law should have been allowed. But that law is changed, by whatever mechanism, and that is a bit different to acting in contravention of a law.

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#116
post #58
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of this 'How China Works' is new to anyone. Canada should have considered it when deciding to get involved. While the majority of US Federal prosecutions are honest, FBI agents and US attorneys do get involved in misapplication of the law and reckless prosecution for political or personal reasons. And our president respecting rule of law or being better than Xi on any measure except successful criminal behavior…

Canada absolutely should not have considered it when deciding to get involved. Canada, like any civilized nation, should follow the rule of law. If that has consequences for our deals with and nationals living in totalitarian states, so be it. You shouldn't get to be above the law just because a big trading partner wants you to be. Canada doesn't have a president, but the idea that our Prime Minister, or more importa…

My understanding is that these treaties are not so cut and dry. Treaty extraditions to the US have been refused on grounds of human rights, probable cause and documentation issues and I've never known of retaliation for failure to act. The US trend of "The World is My Jurisdiction" is sketchy and arguable enough for a country to refuse.

In his official actions Trump has shown that he does not know what the law even is so expecting him to respect it is like a pipe dream. And what has come out about some of his personal actions in the past doesn't give much hope either.

(I'm an American so when I speak about "our" I mean US)

Re: Second Canadian 'missing' in China

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Didn't Trump nominate the supreme court justice? And isn't the nomination confirmed by congress? What about the constant conservative vs democrat number battle in the supreme court? I am not from the US but another democratic country. So I think I can provide an answer. Being nominated(in democracies) doesn't imply that they've to play by the nominator's rules. In democracies, all branches of the Government have to…

That's not the way things work in the US. First, the president is not a figurehead of the legislature. He's the head of a separate branch of government called the executive... which also contains all US agencies: DOJ, NASA, HUD, CIA, BLM, SEC, etc. He nominates judges, and the legislature (which is its own branch) decides if they agree with his picks (by voting in the senate). Similarly, he nominates people to overse…

Thanks for the information.

US is indeed a presidential system.

Post reply on HN