6 ms·
Huh, why not? If not for people taking advantage of "the system", "the system" would not exist. I mean; here we have a guy that has taken all the advantage of
by esarbe 6y ago
Huh, why not? If not for people taking advantage of "the system", "the system" would not exist.
I mean; here we have a guy that has taken all the advantage of all the benefits a developed industrial country has to offer and then in turn does everything in his power to give back as little as possible.
Hell yeah I'm going to blame him. It's not moral behavior. I don't care whether it is legal or not, he's behaving like a parasite and should be judged according to his behavior.
- magicalist 6y ago> It's not moral behavior. Getting a second citizenship?
- zeruch 6y agoThe act is not in question...its the motives that are.
- ericd 6y agoIt's not necessarily about taxes, the marginal utility of money is basically 0 at his level. I'm guessing he just wants a guarantee of being able to get into the EU in case the political polarization in the US boils over. I certainly would, if I were him, especially given the steady drumbeat of demonization of the rich in the media.
- FDSGSG 6y agoLess hassle with visas? If you want to avoid taxation there are better places to go than Cyprus. People go to Cyprus specifically because they want a Schengen passport.
- kyriakos 6y agoCyprus is not a member of Schengen but as an EU citizen you can still go anywhere in Europe visa free, stay, work and enjoy all benefits as long as you want.
- magicalist 6y agoWell, the article says it's unknown why, but even speculating what nefarious things could you do with it? Cyprus is part of the EU.
- thisisnico 6y agoThis is the real problem. The EU shouldn't allow sale of citizenship in host countries, essentially paying a way to get into the EU. I highly doubt that would be possible to enforce though.
- kyriakos 6y agoThe Cyprus passport scheme has ended this month, only applications submitted before the end of October are considered. The same I believe applies to Malta which had a similar scheme.
- kazen44 6y agoit is a hotly debated topic in the EU and seems to be up for removal in the current years, especially in the current political climate.
- esarbe 6y agoYeah, it's a real mystery. https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/cyprus-tax-for-non-residents/ https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/cyprus-tax-for-non-re...
- ryanlol 6y agoThis scheme does not work for US citizens. He would have to pay a significant exit tax to give up his US citizenship.
- temp667 6y agoSimple, this was probably in motion during Trump era - and for whatever reason (ability to work overseas, live overseas in EU, own property etc) there was an advantage to having an EU passport. This gets him that. Not totally unreasonable for a global CEO.
- esarbe 6y agoBailing on your taxes. Or what else do you think he's doing it for?
- gruez 6y agoWon't he also have to renounce his US citizenship, since US collects taxes on world wide income?
- kylebenzle 6y agoOnly if he wants to avoid paying taxes on money he makes moving forward.
- FDSGSG 6y agoIsn't that exactly what esarbe is trying to imply?
- eatmyshorts 6y agoHe'll have to renounce his US citizenship, which means he would never again be able to set foot in the US (even for "connecting flights").
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agowait. if you renounce your citizenship you are denied entry? wouldn't he be able to just travel to the US under the same rules as any other Cypriot citizen?
- adventured 6y agoNone of what the parent said is correct. You would be treated like any other citizen of Cyprus if you revoked your US citizenship. Besides that, Schmidt is part of the Davos zillionaire elite, the US isn't going to deny him access.
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago
- Barrin92 6y agoBuying one. Citizenship is something that ought to be earned and given to people who show that they want to live in and contribute to a country. People like Schmidt purchase themselves a tax excemption or freedom of movement in a world where ordinary people right now lose their jobs and are locked into their country.
- FDSGSG 6y agoThis feels like suggesting that it's immoral to buy a car because someone else might not be able to. >People like Schmidt purchase themselves [...] freedom of movement This is not immoral. >where ordinary people [...] are locked into their country This is
- esarbe 6y agoNo. Buying a car is not necessarily parasitic behavior. Bailing on your taxes is.
- eatmyshorts 6y agoAmerican citizens living and working abroad still must pay taxes to the US Government. As far as I am aware, the US is the only country in the world with this requirement. There is a reason the FBAR requirement is often called the "fubar" requirement.
- DoingIsLearning 6y agoFYI not just any citizenship. On top of the obvious tax benefits in Cyprus, the country is also member state of the EU since 2004. That means 'Citizenship of the European Union', that includes the ability to travel to anywhere in the EU (visa free), the Ability to reside anywhere in the EU, hell Schmidt could even run for public office in any EU local governments municipal elections if he so wishes.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago> hell Schmidt could even run for public office in any EU local governments municipal elections if he so wishes. Here's an idea for a short story: Schmidt does indeed wish so; he becomes a politician in the EU and places himself in a position that allows him to make the EU a much more friendly place for the adtech industry and surveillance capitalism.
- ryanlol 6y ago> On top of the obvious tax benefits in Cyprus There are no tax benefits for US citizens in Cyprus. Giving up your US citizenship involves a significant exit tax.
- DoingIsLearning 6y ago> There are no tax benefits for US citizens in Cyprus - Dividend gains exemption - Capital gains exemption - Pension income capped at 5% - Abolished inheritance tax - All of the above plus bonus EU freedom of movement/residence The guys fortune is parked on GOOG stock how can you say he has nothing to gain? There is a reason russian oligarchs are parking their money in that tiny island.
- ryanlol 6y agoYou don’t get to take advantage of these benefits as a US citizen.
- s5300 6y agoErr... welcome to capitalism. You're allowed to financially rape and pillage as you please. Who are we to decide what's "moral" or not.
- esarbe 6y agoThat's not basis for a functioning social contract. You need a functioning social contract to enjoy the fruits of your labor or spoils of war.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dheera 6y ago> that has taken all the advantage of all the benefits a developed industrial country has to offer a. He has also given a lot more back to the said country. than he has taken from it, IMO. Imagine what life would be like without Google. b. Google is a global company, not just a US company c. I don't believe in the notion of nations or citizenship and don't blame him if he doesn't either and is switching citizenships just for convenience/logistics.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- esarbe 6y agoYou mean, you consider the creation of abusive monopolist as something positive? Interesting point of view!
- throwaways885 6y agoAbsolutely, Google has added to this world, not taken away from it. Being a potentially abusive company is a completely different matter, but it doesn't automatically invalidate the good things and I still consider it better off existing than not. In any case, with Trump gone nobody will be around to fight Google if that's your desire.
- jfk13 6y ago> Google has added to this world, not taken away from it There was a time when I would have agreed with this claim, but I'm not so sure these days.
- chmod600 6y agoHe should be forced to abide by the laws while he lives or does business here. But if he wants to live in a new place by a new set of laws in the future, I'm not sure what's wrong with that. It seems more like you regret the laws in the US during the decades he was here, and you are hoping future changes in the law will retroactively address your concerns. But I see no moral basis for that stance. If we want to change the law, we should be forced to consider the effects on the future, and whether those laws will negatively impact the wealth created in the future. If we start going back and seizing wealth from the past, that will give us a false sense that the laws are working, until the old money runs out and we look around and don't see anyone creating new wealth.
- addicted 6y agoThe problem is benefiting from the advantages a system gives you, and then using those same benefits to deny others who are seeking those same advantages. Like Paul Ryan who basically made it where he did thanks to US social services but did everything he could while in power to decimate those very services he himself relied upon now that he no longer needed them.
- sonotathrowaway 6y ago> “I am very proud of the structure that we set up. We did it based on the incentives that the governments offered us to operate,” Schmidt told one interviewer in 2012. “It’s called capitalism.” As much as I enjoy watching people dissemble while describing their true actions, there’s not really anyone naive enough to believe Schmidt didn’t actively create the rules google currently operates under, is there? Maybe he really was just a bystander in his company as it poured millions of dollars into lobbying the American government and he was powerless to stop them. Or maybe he though the lobbying did nothing and he thought wasting money was a good thing. Or he’s just lying and hopes people don’t acknowledge that there were maybe half a dozen people who had more power to shape the laws and regulations he operated under. But trying to just pass himself off as an uninvolved observer just rings thoroughly disingenuous.
- chmod600 6y ago
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]