Live data from Hacker News

Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

bbc.com

341–350 of 452 posts

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#341
post #297
post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rest of the population doesn't engage in these ways because it's not worth it for them - they do not pay enough taxes to warrant it. Some people, however, pay lots of taxes - so much that it may make sense for them to spend money and go to great length to somewhat reduce their tax bills. They most probably still pay much more tax than average person - just not as much as they could be paying if they didn't use these…

> it's not worth it for them - they do not pay enough taxes to warrant it Not only do they pay a larger portion of their fortune, that money makes a much bigger difference to them (us, why do I say them?) in our everyday lives. > They most probably still pay much more tax than average person They probably pay much less than what they should . They benefit from from an organized state much more than the average person…

This is so true, otherwise businesses would be flocking to set up in low regulation, low tax countries like Somalia.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#342
post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fund shrunk by 20% in the last two years (from 2014 to 2016) due to the sanctions and low oil prices. I'd say 10% on a per-year basis is pretty fast. http://old.minfin.ru/en/nationalwealthfund/statistics/amount...

Why are you only cherry picking the data that fits your narrative? The link you included shows that since the time when Putin become a president in 2008 - reserve fund increased by more than 230% in USD and almost 10X in rubbles, the recent drop in reserve fund in USD is happening because of the oil prices decrease (same thing is happening with US national reserve [1]) , but even thought oil prices dropped by almost…

I'm not cherry picking I'm just talking about the recent years and I'm completely aware that the economic situation is due in large part to low oil prices. There was no problem being popular when high oil prices and an open market meant steadily increasing standard of living. What I'm discussing is how hard it is for any politician to be popular in the face of rapidly decreasing purchasing power and living standard such as when there is a budget deficit and inflation. So why isn't Putins popularity decreasing when the economy is? Is it because the people saw what he did in 2008-2014 and trust he can bring that back? Makes sense, but a diverse media would question that idea. It wouldn't be enough in any country with a working media and opposition. Leaders in working democracies don't have that high approval ratings even in good times.

The last couple of years have seen large inflation, and also stagnated salaries/pensions. This is a very recent phenomenon and started with falling oil prices and was worsened by the Crimea sanctions.

You could argue that discussing 2013-16 is cherry picking but those 3 years are pretty special -- they are the most recent 3!

With the sanctions in place 7+ percent inflation and oil prices looking to stay low for a long time, spending 5-6% on the military while the public can buy less every month for their salaries is only sustainable in one single way - make a story that the nation is in a conflict with an external enemy. That it's "us against them". It's simple nationalism and it has always worked. To support that story you cannot have an alternative narrative either so you must effectively control media and ensure there is no working opposition. This is exactly what the rest of the world believe has happened, which is why everyone is worried. It's becaus we fear that given enough time - the people of Ru wouldn't actually know they don't like Putin because there is no media that gives them any reason not to!

The point isn't that Putin is mismanaging the economy directly - it's that he is isolating Russia economically e.g by the Crimea story which will hurt the economy over time.

The same would happen in the US if Mr Trump was elected, but the difference there would be that media would eat him alive after that (e.g alienating Mexico or the entire Muslim world) and the opposition would win in a landslide come the next election.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#343
post #216

When the first three leaders named are the top 3 enemies/adversaries of the US/Britain - Putin, Xi and Assad - my own little conspiracy canary started chirping. And the Icelandic PM? The one who really annoyed Britain by defaulting on their debts? Makes me wonder who orchestrated the leak.

https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160403-panama-papers-global-... > In 2013, U.K. leader David Cameron urged his country’s overseas territories — including the British Virgin Islands — to work with him to “get our own houses in order” and join the fight against tax evasion and offshore secrecy. > He could have looked no further than his late father to see how challenging that would be. > Ian Cameron, a stockbroker and…

The information about Cameron's father pretty much came out already 4 years ago (already after his father was dead), so not like this personal link hurts Cameron a lot more with the current list of names.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#344
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what OP meant is that there are reasons for companies to be off-shore which are totally above board. A common reason that investment funds are in off-shore tax-havens is because they have lots of international investors. If the fund was say in the US all the investors would have to file tax documents in the US even if they weren't US based, by being based in a tax haven it means investors only have to file lo…

Is that really true? I am not a US citizen but I have an account with a US broker. I just need to file a single form once in a while declaring my foreign tax status and that's it. This can hardly be the reason why it is absolutely necessary to have offshore holdings. (Of course, I have to pay taxes at home for any profits and there are supposed to be mechanisms that ensure I do...)

If you deal in volatile markets with questionable rule of the law and weak property rights (e.g. Russia or much of the Middle East), then the ownership and its transfer is often structured with offshore companies.

The leak however suggests the legit offshore cases are drop in the bucket in this overall money laundering business. Kind of like with file sharing, many would argue we need it primarily to get our latest Ubuntu ISOs and other legit uses, but we all know it's a lie.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#345
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring fairness of certain taxes and issues with tax laws in general, taxes are the rent one has to pay for living in a place. If you don't have income you usually won't pay most taxes at all. It's arguable how much of the tax system works and what parts are just plain broken and favor certain interest groups, but that's an implementation detail. If you visit places where much of the population evades taxes, you'll…

The U.S. has a very strange corporate tax system. Why should Apple have to pay U.S. taxes on the profits they make selling in Germany a phone made of Korean components in a Chinese factory? That's above and beyond whatever taxes they're paying in the supplier nations and in Germany itself, which I assume are not insignificant.

Usually states want to see taxes for stuff bought by people on their premises, and this is where Google and co are escaping, but this is all a little unclear with e-commerce and all.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#346
post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about non billionaires? These arrangements aren't overly expensive and are very much suitable for perfectly "ordinary" people.

That's what shits me. If it's smart, viable strategy, why not make it available by default for every citizen with a basic tax framework instead of something only available to the wealth to push further ahead?

Because the average citizen doesn't donate nearly enough money to politicians' campaigns.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could not agree more. Our society is based on the foundation that everybody does her/his own fair share, if the leaders of the world think it is not the way then lets just stop paying taxes and see how fast things change. One funny thing about humanity, we used to pay 1/10 of our income that was enough for the "state", I am paying 65% (that is right) of my income to the sate right now and it is not enough, I have to…

Where do you live that has a >65% top income tax rate? Because I quite like the sound of it. Or are you conflating other taxes and presenting an overall figure?

He isn’t “conflating”, he clearly said this is the total paid to the government — i.e. all sorts of taxes. That you like the sound of it is, frankly, horrible.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#348
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what OP meant is that there are reasons for companies to be off-shore which are totally above board. A common reason that investment funds are in off-shore tax-havens is because they have lots of international investors. If the fund was say in the US all the investors would have to file tax documents in the US even if they weren't US based, by being based in a tax haven it means investors only have to file lo…

Is that really true? I am not a US citizen but I have an account with a US broker. I just need to file a single form once in a while declaring my foreign tax status and that's it. This can hardly be the reason why it is absolutely necessary to have offshore holdings. (Of course, I have to pay taxes at home for any profits and there are supposed to be mechanisms that ensure I do...)

I believe it depends on the nature of the investment and your relationship with the US. For example I believe in your situation you'd have to pay US taxes on dividends from US companies.

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#349
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The heads up was given a long time ago, you won't find their names in the leak, it's kinda funny Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson is being outed, I guess he didn't get the memo on account of his recent actions.

The leak is of historical documents dating back decades, not a snapshot of current setups. So I don't see why that'd affect anything. I really doubt this is some sort of official leak though. Governments hate leaks of all kinds.

Something for thought http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-27/the-world-...

Re: Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca leak reveals elite's tax havens

#350
post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only "fair" tax type is VAT for humans. Buying a SUV -> You pay 10,000 USD in taxes. Buying bread -> You pay 0.01 USD in taxes. We could get rid off income tax at all and just increase the VAT to ~20 - 50% depending on the type of the product. This way it is almost impossible to cheat. Solving taxation for corporations still an issue though.

VAT is crazily regressive because those who make the least spend far larger proportions of their income buying stuff for it. Most countries with VAT end up with complicated rules for exemptions for basic goods as a result, to try to balance it better.

It is not complicated to me:

- food, books, medicine, ... -> lower VAT

- cars, luxury items -> higher VAT

Post reply on HN