4 ms·
> It stops US companies that rely on government provided infrastructure from shirking their financial obligations. It also stops foreign companies from getting
by anamax 17y ago
> It stops US companies that rely on government provided infrastructure from shirking their financial obligations.
It also stops foreign companies from getting their money out.
If you were a outside the US and considering investing, how would this affect your decision? Is this result good or bad?
I ask because I like foreign investment and recognize that foreign investors have alternatives.
- yardie 17y agoThen I should amend it to say that it stops all companies that rely on US infrastructure from shirking their financial obligations. If you were a foreign investor you'll read the tax code and weigh the pros and cons. If you don't like the terms invest somewhere else, you'll find a lot of developed countries have had this on the books. If you make a profit in the US expect to get taxed on that profit. Small companies do it, big multinationals should too.
- anamax 17y agoSuppose that a foreign investor is thinking about loaning my company $1M. This rule says that 30% of my loan payments will be seized at the border. What sort of interest rate will that investor demand? > If you make a profit in the US expect to get taxed on that profit. You didn't read the regulation - it says nothing about profit. It says transfers. The obvious hack is to buy goods and export those for resale. This increases transaction costs and leads to comparable export control regulations. Congrats - you've just killed your economy. > you'll find a lot of developed countries have had this on the books. Oh really? Please provide relevant cites.