43 ms·

The issue behind this event is not tax evasion, which would not make headlines or HN, and we have no way of knowing if she indeed evaded taxes. All we know is t

The issue behind this event is not tax evasion, which would not make headlines or HN, and we have no way of knowing if she indeed evaded taxes. All we know is that the Chinese government has the power to kidnap people and coerce them into saying whatever the government wants.

nkurz 8y ago
we have no way of knowing if she indeed evaded taxes Are there sources claiming that this was a false confession, and that she did not actually falsify her tax returns? I agree that in principle this is a possibility, but I haven't seen such claims. The New Yorker article seems typical in assuming her guilt: "In a nation of runaway economic growth, where tax evasion is rampant among the wealthy, what struck many people was not Fan’s alleged misdeed—that was predictable enough to be banal—but the startling way in which her case was handled." Similarly, for discussion of the NYT article, I think it's generally assumed that the blatant manipulations of the appraised values happened, the only question is whether it was illegal, and if so, whether it's prosecutable. While you are right that the headlines are primarily because of the "disappearance" of a celebrity, some people (like me) are equally interested in the larger question of whether tax laws can be reasonably enforced without resorting to such measures.
- forapurpose 8y ago
  There is no evidence that she evaded taxes presented by the state, and she has not been given the opportunity to challenge the evidence or present any defense. A confession coerced by an oppressive state is not evidence; it would not be accepted by evidence by any legitimate court. That's why legitimate governments have rule of law, courts, trials, juries, and due process. Furthermore, persecution for alleged financial corruption is a standard modus operendi for oppressive states. As examples, Xi has been doing it to his political opposition, Putin does it, and the current Saudi Arabian dictator is another example.
  - nkurz 8y ago
    There is no evidence that she evaded taxes presented by the state, and she has not been given the opportunity to challenge the evidence or present any defense. As I said, this is theoretically possible, but I haven't seen sources claiming that the charges are a complete sham. Can you find some? That's why legitimate governments have rule of law, courts, trials, juries, and due process. It's interesting that you emphasize "juries" as the key element of a legitimate government. Did you know that Germany doesn't use them? https://www.howtogermany.com/pages/legal.html https://www.howtogermany.com/pages/legal.html Some even argue that using a panel of trained judges provides better justice than using a group of untrained citizens: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/what-america-can-learn-from-germanys-justice-system/258208/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/what-am... Is it a better approach? I don't know, but I don't think trial by jury should be considered a required characteristic for a legitimate government.
    - forapurpose 8y ago
      The burden of proof is on the accuser, and in legitimate government, on the state. I could say you are a thief or an axe murderer - are you required to disprove it if I don't back up my claim? In fact, it would be slander on my part. See my GP comment regarding other elements due process. Until they prove otherwise, she is innocent.

nkurz 8y ago

we have no way of knowing if she indeed evaded taxes Are there sources claiming that this was a false confession, and that she did not actually falsify her tax returns? I agree that in principle this is a possibility, but I haven't seen such claims. The New Yorker article seems typical in assuming her guilt: "In a nation of runaway economic growth, where tax evasion is rampant among the wealthy, what struck many people was not Fan’s alleged misdeed—that was predictable enough to be banal—but the startling way in which her case was handled." Similarly, for discussion of the NYT article, I think it's generally assumed that the blatant manipulations of the appraised values happened, the only question is whether it was illegal, and if so, whether it's prosecutable. While you are right that the headlines are primarily because of the "disappearance" of a celebrity, some people (like me) are equally interested in the larger question of whether tax laws can be reasonably enforced without resorting to such measures.

forapurpose 8y ago
There is no evidence that she evaded taxes presented by the state, and she has not been given the opportunity to challenge the evidence or present any defense. A confession coerced by an oppressive state is not evidence; it would not be accepted by evidence by any legitimate court. That's why legitimate governments have rule of law, courts, trials, juries, and due process. Furthermore, persecution for alleged financial corruption is a standard modus operendi for oppressive states. As examples, Xi has been doing it to his political opposition, Putin does it, and the current Saudi Arabian dictator is another example.
- nkurz 8y ago
  There is no evidence that she evaded taxes presented by the state, and she has not been given the opportunity to challenge the evidence or present any defense. As I said, this is theoretically possible, but I haven't seen sources claiming that the charges are a complete sham. Can you find some? That's why legitimate governments have rule of law, courts, trials, juries, and due process. It's interesting that you emphasize "juries" as the key element of a legitimate government. Did you know that Germany doesn't use them? https://www.howtogermany.com/pages/legal.html https://www.howtogermany.com/pages/legal.html Some even argue that using a panel of trained judges provides better justice than using a group of untrained citizens: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/what-america-can-learn-from-germanys-justice-system/258208/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/what-am... Is it a better approach? I don't know, but I don't think trial by jury should be considered a required characteristic for a legitimate government.
  - forapurpose 8y ago
    The burden of proof is on the accuser, and in legitimate government, on the state. I could say you are a thief or an axe murderer - are you required to disprove it if I don't back up my claim? In fact, it would be slander on my part. See my GP comment regarding other elements due process. Until they prove otherwise, she is innocent.