5 ms·

A surprising number of Americans seem to think it's reasonable to tax non-residents, so such legislation may be hard to get passed. If you support such legisla

by C4K3 6y ago

A surprising number of Americans seem to think it's reasonable to tax non-residents, so such legislation may be hard to get passed. If you support such legislation, consider supporting lobbying groups such as American Citizens Abroad https://www.americansabroad.org/ https://www.americansabroad.org/

Digit-Al 6y ago
> A surprising number of Americans seem to think it's reasonable to tax non-residents, so such legislation may be hard to get passed. So let's get this straight. On one side you have Americans who think it's reasonable to tax people who don't live in the country and thus don't use any of the services that tax pays for and then on the other side you have Americans who believe that all tax is theft under the threat of violence? Talk about extremists at both ends.
- dasudasu 6y ago
  It's not true to say they necessarily don't use any of the services. The US still defend its citizens abroad, and might evacuate you in case some disaster happens, do hostage rescue using the full power of its military and intelligence agencies, and will generally provide consular help and speak on your behalf should you get into trouble.
  - Digit-Al 6y ago
    I don't buy it. We're talking here about people who have literally never lived in America since they were too young to even remember. They have lived in another country, paid taxes in that other country, and probably have a passport for that other country. If anything happens to them there would likely be an expectation that their adopted country would look after them, not the US.
  - eesmith 6y ago
    Odd then that no other country (except Eritrea) follows the US footsteps. The UK and many other countries have the ability to defend its citizens abroad, evacuate them, engage in hostage negotiations, etc. (As I recall, in the UK that cost is paid via part of your passport fees. Not via world-wide taxation and monetary oversight.) That should be "most of its citizens abroad." As we know from Anwar al-Awlaki, the US may decide to remove due-process rights of its citizens and use its military power to kill them.
  - genoissedba 6y ago
    Speaking from personal experience - not really. My employer rescued me. The US did nothing. Maybe you are thinking of France?
- sdenton4 6y ago
  The core psychology of populist American politics is "F$ck you, got mine." Taxing other people is great, putting other people's kids in cages is ok, cutting off University funding is fine once you've gotten yours, etc...
  - whynotminot 6y ago
    Or, “I never got mine so why should you get yours.” Either way, definitely an “FU” mindset.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    This is the coldest and most confused take on populism I’ve seen on this platform (as an anti-populist).
    - whynotminot 6y ago
      Populism is cold and confused and often lacks for internal logic. How else would you describe it, Mr/Ms Supposedly Anti-Populist?
      - nverno 6y ago
        Simply a general mistrust of big centralized government doesn't sound so negative.
        whynotminot 6y ago
        General mistrust is fine. I'm a hedonist liberal and I still want lots of transparency and good oversight of my government. My populist friends and colleagues don't want good government. They barely want any functioning government.
        centimeter 6y ago
        I think your political classifications are whack; your descriptions of what you call "populists" don't ring true at all.
- centimeter 6y ago
  Turns out that when you have 330M people with completely incompatible ethnocultural backgrounds, you end up with an untenably wide variance in political beliefs. Europeans take note; this is where many of you are heading.
  - j4yav 6y ago
    Isn't this essentially exactly what they for some period said of every new ethnic or religious group in the US going back to before it was even an independent country? Catholics, Jews, Irish, Chinese, Russians, Muslims, Mexicans, and Italians have all had or are having their time of being seen an existential foreign threat, irredeemably incompatible and insidiously perverting the pure culture (at least by some), and that's just off the top of my head.
    - centimeter 6y ago
      > Isn't this essentially exactly what they for some period said Yeah, and they were mostly correct. That's how we ended up with the situation we have today. That's literally the point of my post.
      - j4yav 6y ago
        Out of curiosity who were the pure originals in your view? Native Americans?
  - ehmish 6y ago
    It leads to carnage, sure, but also leads to the United States being a very interesting and dynamic country. If i could live there i would.
  - sdenton4 6y ago
    Wouldn't your thesis predict more political problems in areas of greatest diversity (ie, cities)? The cleft in the US runs mainly between rural and urban populations; ie, between high-diversity and low diversity areas. Each 'system' seems to find political equilibria just fine on their own. (Or, in a more flippant form: I hadn't noticed Toronto had become a hellscape of inter-ethnic conflict...)
kingosticks 6y ago
If wonder if all those same Americans would think it reasonable the non-resident tax payers finally got something for their tax returns/hoop-jumping, in the shape of coronavirus support cheques. Thanks to that I think I've almost broken even. Apart from all the wasted time, of course.
- voisin 6y ago
  If your total lifetime costs to date of compliance as an American abroad amount to the coronavirus support cheque value, you should be running a popular YouTube channel teaching others. For most people in this situation that I know, the costs are $4-6k per year, minimum. Heaven forbid they try to make use of their local country retirement schemes, or have anything but the basic banking services and do not participate in partnerships or other “complicated” legal entities.
  - kingosticks 6y ago
    I've kept my financial situation very simple, I've likely sacrificed some (potential investment) income from doing so. I used an accountant the first few times who taught me what I needed to know and then I waste part of my life each year remembering how it works and researching the changes. Perhaps I also don't earn as much as the people you know, no idea. Due to exclusion and the credit I thankfully (and IMO, fairly) pay very little US tax each year, my major costs have been those initial accoutant fees. That wasn't worth a youtube channel (the income from which would only complicate my future returns, no thanks). But I would like to hold some investments and that's an area I have no US tax knowledge of. So that'd be another accountant hit. Maybe renouncing is the better investment, once it becomes available again.

by C4K3 6y ago

Digit-Al 6y ago

> A surprising number of Americans seem to think it's reasonable to tax non-residents, so such legislation may be hard to get passed. So let's get this straight. On one side you have Americans who think it's reasonable to tax people who don't live in the country and thus don't use any of the services that tax pays for and then on the other side you have Americans who believe that all tax is theft under the threat of violence? Talk about extremists at both ends.

dasudasu 6y ago
It's not true to say they necessarily don't use any of the services. The US still defend its citizens abroad, and might evacuate you in case some disaster happens, do hostage rescue using the full power of its military and intelligence agencies, and will generally provide consular help and speak on your behalf should you get into trouble.
- Digit-Al 6y ago
  I don't buy it. We're talking here about people who have literally never lived in America since they were too young to even remember. They have lived in another country, paid taxes in that other country, and probably have a passport for that other country. If anything happens to them there would likely be an expectation that their adopted country would look after them, not the US.
- eesmith 6y ago
  Odd then that no other country (except Eritrea) follows the US footsteps. The UK and many other countries have the ability to defend its citizens abroad, evacuate them, engage in hostage negotiations, etc. (As I recall, in the UK that cost is paid via part of your passport fees. Not via world-wide taxation and monetary oversight.) That should be "most of its citizens abroad." As we know from Anwar al-Awlaki, the US may decide to remove due-process rights of its citizens and use its military power to kill them.
- genoissedba 6y ago
  Speaking from personal experience - not really. My employer rescued me. The US did nothing. Maybe you are thinking of France?
sdenton4 6y ago
The core psychology of populist American politics is "F$ck you, got mine." Taxing other people is great, putting other people's kids in cages is ok, cutting off University funding is fine once you've gotten yours, etc...
- whynotminot 6y ago
  Or, “I never got mine so why should you get yours.” Either way, definitely an “FU” mindset.
- centimeter 6y ago
  This is the coldest and most confused take on populism I’ve seen on this platform (as an anti-populist).
  - whynotminot 6y ago
    Populism is cold and confused and often lacks for internal logic. How else would you describe it, Mr/Ms Supposedly Anti-Populist?
    - nverno 6y ago
      Simply a general mistrust of big centralized government doesn't sound so negative.
      - whynotminot 6y ago
        General mistrust is fine. I'm a hedonist liberal and I still want lots of transparency and good oversight of my government. My populist friends and colleagues don't want good government. They barely want any functioning government.
        centimeter 6y ago
        I think your political classifications are whack; your descriptions of what you call "populists" don't ring true at all.
centimeter 6y ago
Turns out that when you have 330M people with completely incompatible ethnocultural backgrounds, you end up with an untenably wide variance in political beliefs. Europeans take note; this is where many of you are heading.
- j4yav 6y ago
  Isn't this essentially exactly what they for some period said of every new ethnic or religious group in the US going back to before it was even an independent country? Catholics, Jews, Irish, Chinese, Russians, Muslims, Mexicans, and Italians have all had or are having their time of being seen an existential foreign threat, irredeemably incompatible and insidiously perverting the pure culture (at least by some), and that's just off the top of my head.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    > Isn't this essentially exactly what they for some period said Yeah, and they were mostly correct. That's how we ended up with the situation we have today. That's literally the point of my post.
    - j4yav 6y ago
      Out of curiosity who were the pure originals in your view? Native Americans?
- ehmish 6y ago
  It leads to carnage, sure, but also leads to the United States being a very interesting and dynamic country. If i could live there i would.
- sdenton4 6y ago
  Wouldn't your thesis predict more political problems in areas of greatest diversity (ie, cities)? The cleft in the US runs mainly between rural and urban populations; ie, between high-diversity and low diversity areas. Each 'system' seems to find political equilibria just fine on their own. (Or, in a more flippant form: I hadn't noticed Toronto had become a hellscape of inter-ethnic conflict...)

kingosticks 6y ago

If wonder if all those same Americans would think it reasonable the non-resident tax payers finally got something for their tax returns/hoop-jumping, in the shape of coronavirus support cheques. Thanks to that I think I've almost broken even. Apart from all the wasted time, of course.

voisin 6y ago
If your total lifetime costs to date of compliance as an American abroad amount to the coronavirus support cheque value, you should be running a popular YouTube channel teaching others. For most people in this situation that I know, the costs are $4-6k per year, minimum. Heaven forbid they try to make use of their local country retirement schemes, or have anything but the basic banking services and do not participate in partnerships or other “complicated” legal entities.
- kingosticks 6y ago
  I've kept my financial situation very simple, I've likely sacrificed some (potential investment) income from doing so. I used an accountant the first few times who taught me what I needed to know and then I waste part of my life each year remembering how it works and researching the changes. Perhaps I also don't earn as much as the people you know, no idea. Due to exclusion and the credit I thankfully (and IMO, fairly) pay very little US tax each year, my major costs have been those initial accoutant fees. That wasn't worth a youtube channel (the income from which would only complicate my future returns, no thanks). But I would like to hold some investments and that's an area I have no US tax knowledge of. So that'd be another accountant hit. Maybe renouncing is the better investment, once it becomes available again.