3 ms·

Wasn't he a US citizen when he sued in US court for proper recognition and partial ownership? It seems only fair to pay American tax on the fruit of that windfa

by roc 14y ago

Wasn't he a US citizen when he sued in US court for proper recognition and partial ownership? It seems only fair to pay American tax on the fruit of that windfall. How far would his case against Zuckerberg have gone if he'd filed it in Singapore?

sp332 14y ago
He's already paying the 15% capital gains tax on the stock that he owns, which comes to about $500MM. The $170MM must be referring to something else.
beagle3 14y ago
You can file in a US court even if you are not a US citizen, you know -- it's not like US people are given a carte blanche to cheat other nations.
- onetwothreefour 14y ago
  Dude, you wouldn't want to bring logic and facts into this debate, let alone questioning THE GREATEST NATION ON EARTH. :) What the hell happened to HN?
- roc 14y ago
  I'll be the first to admit that I don't know how jurisdiction would work in a case like that. But it seems to me that paying taxes on money recovered for you by a legal system is a fair price for the service. If the legal system was corrupt or inefficient, he'd never have gotten his money. It only seems fair to pay to support it. Particularly given the fairly low tax rate. There are precious few places and ways you can earn hundreds of millions of dollars and only pay 15% on them. That said, it sounds like he has paid tax once and is possibly trying to avoid paying tax on the appreciation of that property, which I will also admit muddies the waters quite a bit.
  - beagle3 14y ago
    > But it seems to me that paying taxes on money recovered for you by a legal system is a fair price for the service. Basically, you can use the US court system even if you never once set foot in the US, and never had a US passport - as long as the party you are suing is bound by US law. Theoretically, the outcome should be the same. I'm not sure what the tax consequences are, but in general, if you get a remedy from the court, the tax is the same as the original transaction (possibly none).

by roc 14y ago

sp332 14y ago

He's already paying the 15% capital gains tax on the stock that he owns, which comes to about $500MM. The $170MM must be referring to something else.

beagle3 14y ago

You can file in a US court even if you are not a US citizen, you know -- it's not like US people are given a carte blanche to cheat other nations.

onetwothreefour 14y ago
Dude, you wouldn't want to bring logic and facts into this debate, let alone questioning THE GREATEST NATION ON EARTH. :) What the hell happened to HN?
roc 14y ago
I'll be the first to admit that I don't know how jurisdiction would work in a case like that. But it seems to me that paying taxes on money recovered for you by a legal system is a fair price for the service. If the legal system was corrupt or inefficient, he'd never have gotten his money. It only seems fair to pay to support it. Particularly given the fairly low tax rate. There are precious few places and ways you can earn hundreds of millions of dollars and only pay 15% on them. That said, it sounds like he has paid tax once and is possibly trying to avoid paying tax on the appreciation of that property, which I will also admit muddies the waters quite a bit.
- beagle3 14y ago
  > But it seems to me that paying taxes on money recovered for you by a legal system is a fair price for the service. Basically, you can use the US court system even if you never once set foot in the US, and never had a US passport - as long as the party you are suing is bound by US law. Theoretically, the outcome should be the same. I'm not sure what the tax consequences are, but in general, if you get a remedy from the court, the tax is the same as the original transaction (possibly none).