51–60 of 143 posts
It's perhaps not a coincidence that those countries are active in the diamond trade. Perhaps it is. But that information is in the data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice textbook phrases. What does it matter whether laws are broken or not if the result is still people not paying their taxes while benefiting massively from society. If the best you can say about someone's behavior is that it's "not technically illegal", that's quite telling. And don't get me started on Switzerland. I live there. I'm Swiss. We have massive tax evasion. We have special tax deals for foreign national…
This is a perfect example of why taxing income is not the correct way. Things like progressive sales tax and taxing usage is. For example, those commuters should be taxed enough to support their burden each time they come in to the city. And for those companies within the city limits enjoying the infrastructure, protection of law, etc, a sales tax on their products sold should cover that. The point of tax extraction…
Some usage taxes might work, but unless they specifically target out-of-canton persons, they will just drive more rich people out of Zurich, exacerbating the problem.
At the end of the day having every 20x30 miles plot of your country independently decide on taxation is not be the best idea.
Different tax regimes can only coexist when taxpayers' mobility is limited, otherwise the cheapest tax-land wins.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that standard sales tax is regressive by nature (poor people spend a much higher percent of their income than rich people).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I recall, to get prosecuted for tax evasion in the UK, you need to not only commit the tax evasion, but also to lie to the HMRC investigation of the tax evasion, at the point where they ask you to sign a form that explicitly says that if you lie now and they find out, they will put you in jail. So unless you lie at that point, you will not be prosecuted, only investigated. This may let some tax dodgers off the hoo…
Is that really true?! If so it seems that a winning strategy is to actively try to dodge the system but be prepared to pay it back when you know you'll get found out. That makes no sense. Why would that same rule not apply to other crime?
Furthermore, the same rule also applies to other crimes. The rule is called "innocent until proven guilty".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a perfect example of why taxing income is not the correct way. Things like progressive sales tax and taxing usage is. For example, those commuters should be taxed enough to support their burden each time they come in to the city. And for those companies within the city limits enjoying the infrastructure, protection of law, etc, a sales tax on their products sold should cover that. The point of tax extraction…
What should the sales tax be progressive on? You don't know the buyer's income when they pay for stuff. Some usage taxes might work, but unless they specifically target out-of-canton persons, they will just drive more rich people out of Zurich, exacerbating the problem. At the end of the day having every 20x30 miles plot of your country independently decide on taxation is not be the best idea. Different tax regimes c…
This doesn't appear to be the leaked data, but rather curated profiles of some of the people referenced in the supposedly leaked data. Am I missing something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice textbook phrases, now let's get back to the real world out there for a while. Do you even understand the simple truth, that most of the times no law is broken in tax optimalizations? Only when it does, it gets highly publitized. Usually, tax systems are full of loopholes and accountants just need to be creative enough (and yes, they are...). Without breaking any specific law, by logic "what is not explicitly for…
Nice textbook phrases. What does it matter whether laws are broken or not if the result is still people not paying their taxes while benefiting massively from society. If the best you can say about someone's behavior is that it's "not technically illegal", that's quite telling. And don't get me started on Switzerland. I live there. I'm Swiss. We have massive tax evasion. We have special tax deals for foreign national…
Now that you personally find the already uber-rich Zurich city somehow being on the wrong end of tax deal is your own personal issue.
Personal anecdote - my friend is living in Zurich, commuting daily to Zug for work. But that's another story :)
The pattern is apparent - once you become rich, you don't want to donate millions to governments in taxes. Anyway you do, but trying to minimize it. Be it for their lack of any transparency how cash will be used (mostly wasted in very ineffective way). It doesn't matter if it's famous or unknown rich. Now what to do with this situation... There are too many tax havens out there (Suisse, Monaco, Channel islands, Luxem…
Paying taxes is not "donating money". You are required by law to pay them. You get certain things in exchange, like laws that protect your property. If you think that you shouldn't be forced to pay taxes, why do you think that other laws should be enforced? If rich people steal from the state, why shouldn't poor people just take what they want from the rich? If you avoid taxes, you are stealing from everybody.
If you avoid taxes, you are following the law. No one should pay more than is required of him to pay. If you can structure certain transactions in different ways (e.g. 25% tax vs 50% tax), why would one choose the more expensive option?
If you evade taxes, yes, then you are stealing from everybody. That I do not condone. But, there is a clear difference.
The pattern is apparent - once you become rich, you don't want to donate millions to governments in taxes. Anyway you do, but trying to minimize it. Be it for their lack of any transparency how cash will be used (mostly wasted in very ineffective way). It doesn't matter if it's famous or unknown rich. Now what to do with this situation... There are too many tax havens out there (Suisse, Monaco, Channel islands, Luxem…
Paying taxes is not "donating money". You are required by law to pay them. You get certain things in exchange, like laws that protect your property. If you think that you shouldn't be forced to pay taxes, why do you think that other laws should be enforced? If rich people steal from the state, why shouldn't poor people just take what they want from the rich? If you avoid taxes, you are stealing from everybody.
With the important difference that the price is non-negotiable, and set by the service provider alone. The people highlighted on the website chose to park their property elsewhere, so the government had zero cost in protecting that.
The price is not in proportion to the quality of service at all, it's proportional to the income of the citizen. Which is consistent with what most people understand taxes to be: a wealth redistribution mechanism, rather than a service fee.
> If you avoid taxes, you are stealing from everybody.
If all the people which avoid some taxes currently (basically every large corporation) close down operations in the US and move to a country with more favorable conditions, the theft (under your definition) would stop. Do you think the net gain would be positive?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paying taxes is not "donating money". You are required by law to pay them. You get certain things in exchange, like laws that protect your property. If you think that you shouldn't be forced to pay taxes, why do you think that other laws should be enforced? If rich people steal from the state, why shouldn't poor people just take what they want from the rich? If you avoid taxes, you are stealing from everybody.
That's ridiculous (the second part, not the "donating money" part) If you avoid taxes, you are following the law. No one should pay more than is required of him to pay. If you can structure certain transactions in different ways (e.g. 25% tax vs 50% tax), why would one choose the more expensive option? If you evade taxes, yes, then you are stealing from everybody. That I do not condone. But, there is a clear differen…
People avoiding, not evading, taxes think they are obeying the laws. But sometimes they are using the laws in weird ways and the tax authorities might not agree. Those tax laws get tested in the courts which is a slow expensive process. Or the tax authorities will enter discussion with people using weird tax schemes to try to get some money before going to court.
Tax avoidance used to mean normal tax planning but it has gained a meaning of people using bizarre interpretations of the law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice textbook phrases, now let's get back to the real world out there for a while. Do you even understand the simple truth, that most of the times no law is broken in tax optimalizations? Only when it does, it gets highly publitized. Usually, tax systems are full of loopholes and accountants just need to be creative enough (and yes, they are...). Without breaking any specific law, by logic "what is not explicitly for…
There's a common misconception about progressive tax systems. I'm from the Netherlands, and we've got such a system like that. But it's not true its quite common to pay over 50% taxes. For example, here we got 4 tax-discs, where you pay taxes in a disc until a certain amount of money earned(profits). Disc 1: until €19822,- : 36.50% Disc 2: until €33589,- : 42.00% Disc 3: until €57585,- : 42.00% Disc 4: more €57585,-…