3 ms·

At least an American billionaire pays some American taxes. If a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxe

by rb808 7y ago

At least an American billionaire pays some American taxes. If a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here.

klipt 7y ago
> if a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here. False, even if you're not US resident, you still have to file non-resident tax returns and pay taxes on all US sourced income. https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/nonresident-aliens-source-of-income https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/nonr... > A nonresident alien (NRA) usually is subject to U.S. income tax only on U.S. source income.
tareqak 7y ago
An vacancy tax deals with both domestic and foreign buyers keeping homes unoccupied. Here is the link to the city of Vancouver’s Empty Home Tax: https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-tax.aspx https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-t... .
amenod 7y ago
The cynic in me would correct you that neither pays much taxes.
asdfadsfgfdda 7y ago
They are still paying plenty in property tax. From the city's perspective, you couldn't ask for a better resident. Somebody who pays full property tax and consumes almost no services (schools, police, etc).
- finaliteration 7y ago
  But they also don’t participate in the local economy and can just blindly vote against anything that impacts their bottom line (e.g. tax increases) rather than having to interact with and see the impact on people who actually live and work there whose lives are impacted by local and regional politics.
- zapita 7y ago
  They often pay very little property tax, thanks to California prop 13. Long-time property owners are incentivized to just ride the real estate boom with a vacant building that costs them nothing. The city gets almost no tax revenue, and the neighborhood is crippled in its development. As a bonus those property owners are politically active and fight zoning reform and development/transit projects to protect aforementioned real estate boom.
- s0rce 7y ago
  Why is the city's perspective purely financial? Shouldn't it be driven by the needs of the residents? City residents need housing and the the local business need inhabitants. If you extend your "city" to the limit it would just be a giant physical investment with buildings no one lives in. The city, basically just an investment company would have a lot of money from the taxes and providing minimal services but until that happens the actual residents should drive the policies, in my opinion.
- hello_moto 7y ago
  They drive artificial demands which increases the overall price. At the end of the day, it's not good for the local residents. It's not as simple as "they're not here thus they're not consuming any services". The resulting effect of sky-high property cost ripples to everything else below it (jobs, transportation, etc).
- compiler-guy 7y ago
  They do consume one thing: housing stock that would otherwise be available to residents. Whether or not that outweighs the benefits of paying taxes but not consuming city services is a different issue.
- logfromblammo 7y ago
  The roads, pipes, cables, buses, firefighters, and cops have to go past the empty house to reach the occupied houses on the other side of it. Even if the empty home consumes no water, electricity, classroom capacity, bus seats, etc., it still consumes police and fire protection services. Someone else's empty home can be used for crime without worrying about civil forfeitures. A better resident lives in their home, and cares about what is happening in its neighborhood.
damnyou 7y ago
American billionaires dont pay much taxes either. The solution to this is to fix the tax code, not retreat further into nationalism.
- GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
  >not retreat further into nationalism God forbid we feel any natural affinity towards our fellow countrymen. Any alternative is so artificial and forced.
  - pmoriarty 7y ago
    "God forbid we feel any natural affinity towards our fellow countrymen" Such an affinity is not "natural" because no one is born with any sort of innate ability to distinguish among nationalities, much less feel any affinity towards certain nationalities. Any such distinctions and feelings are taught through indoctrination such as nationalistic rituals, media, and the attitudes of those around you. A nationality is a legal fiction which changes absolutely nothing about who a person really is or what they do. Nationalism and group affiliation have been the causes of some of the worst atrocities in history, so we should be very wary of encouraging either. Regardless of their nationality, I personally feel much more affinity with someone who is helping others over one who is hurting others.
    - GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
      I say national but I mean local as opposed to global. My town is more important than my county which is more important than my state, etc. my philosophy also extends to animals and plants, meaning it’s not a human-centric view but biocentric. It’s doesn’t seem natural to care less about local Bird/insect populations and local ecosystems as much as human poverty on the other side of the planet.
    - homonculus1 7y ago
      There is a good and perfectly natural reason to favor people from our own country: they have to live under the same system as us. They have skin in the game on our team. Someone acting in our country but operating out of a different one can exploit the difference in rules to our detriment (e.g. a Chinese company competing in Western markets, but with the finger of state backing pushing on the scales). On a large enough scale it's a threat to democracy etc. if our group decides that groups no longer matter, and another group doesn't. You can iteratively, conservatively try to approach an equilibrium where borders and divisions no longer matter and all of humanity joins together in enlightenment. That seems to be the general direction we're going and it's a good thing. What you can't do is unilaterally make a cooperative system out of a competitive one. If you go all at once by yourself you just get killed. Nationality is a big (and in some cases literal) Chesterton's Fence. It is somewhat arbitrary, but that doesn't make it meaningless.

by rb808 7y ago

At least an American billionaire pays some American taxes. If a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here.

klipt 7y ago

> if a foreign speculator makes a lot of money they aren't even paying any income or capital gains taxes here. False, even if you're not US resident, you still have to file non-resident tax returns and pay taxes on all US sourced income. https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/nonresident-aliens-source-of-income https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/nonr... > A nonresident alien (NRA) usually is subject to U.S. income tax only on U.S. source income.

tareqak 7y ago

An vacancy tax deals with both domestic and foreign buyers keeping homes unoccupied. Here is the link to the city of Vancouver’s Empty Home Tax: https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-tax.aspx https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/empty-homes-t... .

amenod 7y ago

The cynic in me would correct you that neither pays much taxes.

asdfadsfgfdda 7y ago

They are still paying plenty in property tax. From the city's perspective, you couldn't ask for a better resident. Somebody who pays full property tax and consumes almost no services (schools, police, etc).

finaliteration 7y ago
But they also don’t participate in the local economy and can just blindly vote against anything that impacts their bottom line (e.g. tax increases) rather than having to interact with and see the impact on people who actually live and work there whose lives are impacted by local and regional politics.
zapita 7y ago
They often pay very little property tax, thanks to California prop 13. Long-time property owners are incentivized to just ride the real estate boom with a vacant building that costs them nothing. The city gets almost no tax revenue, and the neighborhood is crippled in its development. As a bonus those property owners are politically active and fight zoning reform and development/transit projects to protect aforementioned real estate boom.
s0rce 7y ago
Why is the city's perspective purely financial? Shouldn't it be driven by the needs of the residents? City residents need housing and the the local business need inhabitants. If you extend your "city" to the limit it would just be a giant physical investment with buildings no one lives in. The city, basically just an investment company would have a lot of money from the taxes and providing minimal services but until that happens the actual residents should drive the policies, in my opinion.
hello_moto 7y ago
They drive artificial demands which increases the overall price. At the end of the day, it's not good for the local residents. It's not as simple as "they're not here thus they're not consuming any services". The resulting effect of sky-high property cost ripples to everything else below it (jobs, transportation, etc).
compiler-guy 7y ago
They do consume one thing: housing stock that would otherwise be available to residents. Whether or not that outweighs the benefits of paying taxes but not consuming city services is a different issue.
logfromblammo 7y ago
The roads, pipes, cables, buses, firefighters, and cops have to go past the empty house to reach the occupied houses on the other side of it. Even if the empty home consumes no water, electricity, classroom capacity, bus seats, etc., it still consumes police and fire protection services. Someone else's empty home can be used for crime without worrying about civil forfeitures. A better resident lives in their home, and cares about what is happening in its neighborhood.

damnyou 7y ago

American billionaires dont pay much taxes either. The solution to this is to fix the tax code, not retreat further into nationalism.

GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
>not retreat further into nationalism God forbid we feel any natural affinity towards our fellow countrymen. Any alternative is so artificial and forced.
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  "God forbid we feel any natural affinity towards our fellow countrymen" Such an affinity is not "natural" because no one is born with any sort of innate ability to distinguish among nationalities, much less feel any affinity towards certain nationalities. Any such distinctions and feelings are taught through indoctrination such as nationalistic rituals, media, and the attitudes of those around you. A nationality is a legal fiction which changes absolutely nothing about who a person really is or what they do. Nationalism and group affiliation have been the causes of some of the worst atrocities in history, so we should be very wary of encouraging either. Regardless of their nationality, I personally feel much more affinity with someone who is helping others over one who is hurting others.
  - GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
    I say national but I mean local as opposed to global. My town is more important than my county which is more important than my state, etc. my philosophy also extends to animals and plants, meaning it’s not a human-centric view but biocentric. It’s doesn’t seem natural to care less about local Bird/insect populations and local ecosystems as much as human poverty on the other side of the planet.
  - homonculus1 7y ago
    There is a good and perfectly natural reason to favor people from our own country: they have to live under the same system as us. They have skin in the game on our team. Someone acting in our country but operating out of a different one can exploit the difference in rules to our detriment (e.g. a Chinese company competing in Western markets, but with the finger of state backing pushing on the scales). On a large enough scale it's a threat to democracy etc. if our group decides that groups no longer matter, and another group doesn't. You can iteratively, conservatively try to approach an equilibrium where borders and divisions no longer matter and all of humanity joins together in enlightenment. That seems to be the general direction we're going and it's a good thing. What you can't do is unilaterally make a cooperative system out of a competitive one. If you go all at once by yourself you just get killed. Nationality is a big (and in some cases literal) Chesterton's Fence. It is somewhat arbitrary, but that doesn't make it meaningless.