4 ms·
You seem to be arguing that he didn't "pay some back when you win". However, as part of the renunciation process you have to be up to date on your taxes, and y
by nirvana 14y ago
You seem to be arguing that he didn't "pay some back when you win". However, as part of the renunciation process you have to be up to date on your taxes, and you have to pay a tax on any money you move out of the USA. Thus he's already paid his taxes.
Now he's a citizen and resident of singapore. He's got a couple investments there. But your claim that he owes the US taxes on what he built in the USA would seem to no longer apply, right? Since he's building the next thing in singapore, wouldn't he owe singaporean taxes?
If he didn't renounce, the US government would be taxing him on the money he makes in Singapore on a singapore business as well. Even though he's no longer benefiting from the "services" provided by the US government.
The US is unusual in the fact that it taxes citizens on their worldwide income. Further, it imposes fairly onerous reporting requirements that make it difficult for US citizens who live outside the USA to conduct business.
Just because he spent 10 years here, doesn't mean the US really deserves a cut of everything he makes for the rest of his life. This is why there's a renunciation process, and he has gone thru that process legally.
- kemiller 14y agoI think the way the US claims taxes on foreign income is wrong. But this is clearly not foreign income, and he's leaving with clear foreknowledge of a likely future windfall. I don't think anyone is claiming he has not complied with the law. They're saying that if he wants to renounce citizenship, he must also renounce the benefits of being in the US. If that's truly his intention anyway, then he has nothing to worry about, right? I'm sure that even if this happens he's not going to shed many tears. If he wants to see his family, they can just meet somewhere else.
- nirvana 14y agoEither he sold his Facebook stock before leaving, in which case he already paid taxes on it. Or he didn't, and since FB is an american company listed on an american exchange, when he sells any of it he'll still be subjected to long term capital gains, as any other non-US citizen who owns stock on a US exchange is. Thus the only thing to be upset about is that we have a person who has the ability to produce a high income for himself that the USA can no longer tax.
- gsb 14y agoNon-resident aliens are specifically excluded from paying capital gains to the US. I wonder why? The US also refuses to collect information on income earned in the US by foreign residents (currently there are some efforts to change this, being obstructed by congress). Of course if you suggest that this means the US is a tax haven then you are in for an earful. Other, bad, countries are tax havens. Never the magnificent USA! A far more equitable solution to the Saverin 'problem' would be to apply CGT to ALL US-derived gains. Most countries do this. But that is unlikely to happen as it would reduce foreign investment...
- hnwh 14y ago"But this is clearly not foreign income" The IRS themselves disagree with you on that statement. http://www.irs.gov/publications/p54/ch04.html#en_US_2011_publink100047450 http://www.irs.gov/publications/p54/ch04.html#en_US_2011_pub...