4 ms·

But the things they mentioned, US Treasuries, stock in US companies ARE benefiting from the US gov't protection. Its not like they are taxing Swiss citizens on

But the things they mentioned, US Treasuries, stock in US companies ARE benefiting from the US gov't protection. Its not like they are taxing Swiss citizens on Swiss stocks traded on Swiss stock exchanges. They may be fairly unique in doing so, but the US is a fairly unique country in terms of percentage of the global economy. Other countries may have no tax in order to entice more investment, the US does not have to do that. If you don't want to pay the taxes, don't invest in the US economy.

CWuestefeld 17y ago
That may be what the OP mentioned, but it's only part of the picture. If I'm an ex-pat, and make my money as (say) a laborer in another country, my income on that labor will be taxed by the US government. What right do they have to it? the things they mentioned, US Treasuries, stock in US companies ARE benefiting from the US gov't protection The companies that our hypothetical expat owns the stock in already paid corporate income taxes for their own protection. Why should he pay again for it? Really, the questions here are * Should the US government be able to dictate the laws of foreign lands, in order to satisfy its own choice of tax regime? * Should the US government be able to dictate that foreign corporations provide data to the US, forcing those foreign corporations to bear the costs for enforcing the American tax regime?
- jhancock 17y ago
  * Should the US government be able to dictate the laws of foreign lands, in order to satisfy its own choice of tax regime? No they should not. But this is not what's happening here. The transactions originated in the U.S. by and through U.S. entities. * Should the US government be able to dictate that foreign corporations provide data to the US, forcing those foreign corporations to bear the costs for enforcing the American tax regime? Again, that's not what's happening here. When UBS or any other foreign bank operates in the U.S., it is incorporated as a U.S. entity and must follow U.S. laws. UBS and such have chose to say "oh, those customers we acquired in the U.S., well, that data is back in Switzerland, and we have strict privacy laws there, so no can do". Sorry, but the transactions originated in the U.S. through the U.S. operating entity, Swiss laws have no say here. These banks have gotten off incredibly light. The U.S. has plenty of existing laws on the books to allow them to seize the assets of the entire bank for their illegal behavior. The only reason they did not is because seizing Swiss banks would have unknowable repercussions from global elite.

CWuestefeld 17y ago

That may be what the OP mentioned, but it's only part of the picture. If I'm an ex-pat, and make my money as (say) a laborer in another country, my income on that labor will be taxed by the US government. What right do they have to it? the things they mentioned, US Treasuries, stock in US companies ARE benefiting from the US gov't protection The companies that our hypothetical expat owns the stock in already paid corporate income taxes for their own protection. Why should he pay again for it? Really, the questions here are * Should the US government be able to dictate the laws of foreign lands, in order to satisfy its own choice of tax regime? * Should the US government be able to dictate that foreign corporations provide data to the US, forcing those foreign corporations to bear the costs for enforcing the American tax regime?

jhancock 17y ago
* Should the US government be able to dictate the laws of foreign lands, in order to satisfy its own choice of tax regime? No they should not. But this is not what's happening here. The transactions originated in the U.S. by and through U.S. entities. * Should the US government be able to dictate that foreign corporations provide data to the US, forcing those foreign corporations to bear the costs for enforcing the American tax regime? Again, that's not what's happening here. When UBS or any other foreign bank operates in the U.S., it is incorporated as a U.S. entity and must follow U.S. laws. UBS and such have chose to say "oh, those customers we acquired in the U.S., well, that data is back in Switzerland, and we have strict privacy laws there, so no can do". Sorry, but the transactions originated in the U.S. through the U.S. operating entity, Swiss laws have no say here. These banks have gotten off incredibly light. The U.S. has plenty of existing laws on the books to allow them to seize the assets of the entire bank for their illegal behavior. The only reason they did not is because seizing Swiss banks would have unknowable repercussions from global elite.