ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, October 06, 2015

Fair play for FATCA

It looks like the Law of Unintended Consequences is about to strike the US federal government again:
This week, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) will announce its final package of measures under its Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project that would enable foreign governments to tax overseas earnings of American companies. If the United States fails to make changes of our own before that plan begins being enacted next year, this effort, which The Wall Street Journal called "a global revenue grab," will ensure much of these American earnings stay overseas permanently.
Considering that the US government claims the right to force foreign banks to track and report its citizens, it's not going to have much of a leg to stand on when foreign governments start claiming the right to tax the earnings of US corporations with bank accounts in their countries.

This is why it is so reprehensibly stupid for the US to insist on intervening in sovereign lands; by doing so it sacrifices its own claims to sovereignty. It is unlikely that Putin would have intervened in Syria if the US had not intervened in Ukraine and Syria. This foreign cash grab probably would not have been successful without FATCA.

Labels: ,

36 Comments:

Blogger rho October 06, 2015 2:36 AM  

Easily rectified. Expand the copyright of all drugs developed in the US and increase the tariff to astronomical levels.

Blogger SciVo October 06, 2015 2:51 AM  

But rho, that would only increase the foreign profits that they're talking about taxing. Trump has a proposal to actually deal with this problem, but it may be too late.

Blogger rho October 06, 2015 3:03 AM  

foreign profits

Profits, not copyright.

Blogger SciVo October 06, 2015 3:10 AM  

So you would send drones to bomb them all if they refuse to submit?

Blogger rho October 06, 2015 3:12 AM  

So you would send drones to bomb them all if they refuse to submit?

You are retarded, and I support your endeavor.

Blogger SciVo October 06, 2015 3:14 AM  

Or perhaps you misunderstood and didn't realize that U.S. copyright law doesn't have global domain without force.

Blogger chris October 06, 2015 5:36 AM  

@rho, your idea is dead and buried. If the TPP goes through as is, NZ gets preferential access for agricultural products and we keep our monopoly drug system (Pharmac) that exists with the sole purpose of screwing the best possible price out of big pharma. Expect other nations to follow.

Blogger ScuzzaMan October 06, 2015 6:30 AM  

Yes, but ...

remember that the OECD and the UN and the IMF and the World Bank are explicitly globalist projects. As such, they are not necessarily directly controlled by the US government, but where the US government's objectives do not conflict with the purposes of those organisations (and here I mean their actual purposes and not their advertising slogans) the US government does exercise the largest share of influence over them. In other words, these organisations often act as proxies for the US government.

It is plain from your prior comments on, e.g., immigration, that you understand that the US government is hellbent on establishing the globalist agenda to the detriment of its own citizens and thus in direct contradiction of its original Constitutional purpose.

So the US government will object, and some uninformed functionaries within it will actively resist, but this will not have any material effect, in the same way that the Pakistani government objects publicly to US drone strikes within its territory, even as it covertly provides the intelligence that directs these attacks and is in all other respects an active accomplice.

Blogger SciVo October 06, 2015 7:35 AM  

ScuzzMan @8, I'm not sure who you're addressing, but if you're talking to me then you are almost entirely correct -- but only almost. If you're saying that the fedgov will roll over and let money walk away because globalism, then you don't understand it at all.

Yes, our government is controlled by unelected third parties. But they didn't park their profits overseas just so that someone else could tax their profits instead.

Blogger SciVo October 06, 2015 7:48 AM  

Sorry, ScuzzaMan. I know we're not supposed to correct typos since it's tedious, but I don't want to look like I got your pseudonym wrong on purpose. That would be impolite.

Blogger Hammerli280 October 06, 2015 8:28 AM  

Vox, I have to disagree with you. Putin would have intervened in Syria in any event. Russia has very long-standing desires for greater influence in the Middle East - in particular, they desperately want to control the Dardanelles. And any client state is better than none in the Great Power Game.

Blogger Nate October 06, 2015 9:09 AM  

its like every decision we make... we make in a vacuum... with no respect or regard to what may happen in response to it.

OpenID Steve October 06, 2015 9:11 AM  

Easily rectified. Expand the copyright of all drugs developed in the US and increase the tariff to astronomical levels

A lot of the world is happy with 30yo medical practices, mainly because they don't know better. The elite in those nations can fly somewhere for foreskin facials & everything else that came about since quinine & PCN. In fact its not a good idea for the 1st world to send out newer antibiotics to the 2/3rd world as that will only get us drug resistant diseases faster.

government is controlled by unelected third parties. But they didn't park their profits overseas just so that someone else could tax

Weekend at Bernie's to the rescue, watch Israel be the new tax haven.

OT: has anyone seen the Martian? I have not yet but someone told me that not 1, but 2 magic negros save the white guy, which would totally destroy suspension of disbelief for me.

Blogger Floyd Looney October 06, 2015 9:17 AM  

The US did not intervene in Ukraine. The US has shown no care at all about Ukraine.

Blogger Josh October 06, 2015 9:19 AM  

And any client state is better than none in the Great Power Game.

You're wrong and historically illiterate. Client states are a net negative for the great power.

OpenID Steve October 06, 2015 9:24 AM  

The US did not intervene in Ukraine. The US has shown no care at all about Ukraine.

Even NPR disagrees. http://www.npr.org/2014/02/06/272638061/leaked-ukraine-phone-call-puts-u-s-credibility-on-the-line

Soros sure cared about that 33tons of gold, & Biden's living cocaine snorting son is in charge of the Ukraine's natural gas now.

Blogger Nate October 06, 2015 9:27 AM  

"The US did not intervene in Ukraine. The US has shown no care at all about Ukraine."

Well... that can just be your little secret...

Blogger toadbile October 06, 2015 9:33 AM  

Decay of Sovereignty is a feature, not a bug.

Blogger Stilicho #0066 October 06, 2015 9:46 AM  

@ Nate, that's a result of President Butt Naked never learning that actions have consequences. He firmly believes that he and his "legion of choom" administration are special little snowflakes to whom normal rules do not apply. After all, he received his participation ribbon from the Nobel Committee just for getting elected and he keeps saying "we are the ones we've been waiting for."

Put another way: he's completely atheistic with respect to the God's of the Copybook Headings...

Blogger Bill October 06, 2015 9:47 AM  

Speaking of Russia in Syria, have you guys been following the FASCINATING tank battle videos? Interestingly, they seem to be following some of the On A Read Horse principals; no air cover, infantry supported by tanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv9DJRvuHyI

Blogger Nate October 06, 2015 9:52 AM  

" that's a result of President Butt Naked never learning that actions have consequences."

Its not just Obama. Its a standard attitude of american politicians on almost all levels.

Blogger FALPhil October 06, 2015 9:57 AM  

@9 Yes, our government is controlled by unelected third parties. But they didn't park their profits overseas just so that someone else could tax their profits instead.

Sure they did. They are going to have to pay taxes one way or the other. They will just figure out which country has the lowest rates and park the profits there.

The USA has one of the highest tax rates on corporations in the world. The socialist/collectivist wing of the Party has pretty much set themselves up for this. Since the USA has continuously voted itself largess since the Wilson administration, we will witness the implosion of the US economy. The only thing that can save the cohesion of the nation would be a complete reversal of several policies, most notably economic, tax, and immigration. And that is not likely to happen due to the fact that (a) the politicians running the country don't understand what they are doing, (b) the politicians running the country do understand transfer payment politics, and (c) it has worked for so long that the politicians cannot conceive of it not working.

Next, consider Eisenhower was right. The military-industrial complex runs our foreign policy. We pick fights with third world shitholes that are absolutely no threat to us whatsoever. Why? So all those DoD firms can keep selling weapons and stay in business. The USA doesn't need one quarter of the military it has if all it wants to do is defend itself. But then, the fact that the federal government doesn't care a whit about its own borders is an indication that it's military might is not about self-defense.

Then, consider that for all intents and purposes, the rule of law is dead in the USA. You have legislators creating laws from which they are exempted, an executive branch that circumvents laws or selectively enforces only those that furthers its agenda, and a court system that creates law out of thin air when it is not overturning valid legislation.

The writing is on the wall, and the time is fast approaching to make a choice: decentalize and have some modicum of controlling your own destiny (liberty), or the inexorable slide into neo-serfdom. I am pretty sure the bread and circuses will ensure the latter. People say that in the new Information Age that can't happen, but those people forget that the Information Highway can be co-opted centrally and there is no alternative unfrastructure with the bandwidth to replace it.

So, I think Vox is correct in his interpretation, but I also think that the players in the drama think that they can control the outcome, and they are fools for thinking they can.

Blogger FALPhil October 06, 2015 9:57 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger ScuzzaMan October 06, 2015 10:17 AM  

@9

Hi SciVo

No, I was responding to the OP (Vox himself) but I was doing so on my phone so ...

Not that I disagree with you in any great material respect, but my point was that our fascist political/industrial class owe their allegiance to something that absolutely is bigger and more powerful than themselves. It has the capacity to destroy them as it has others and they (A) know it, and (B) respect that power as they do little, if anything, else.

So, on the one hand there is their natural, inherent and unvarying self-interest, and on the other hand there is their sure knowledge that their self-interest will not be served by opposing their masters. They might profit in the short term but will be removed from any position of power or privilege or profit if they persist.

There are plenty of examples of the US government spending money (e.g. welfare for illegal invaders) in return for increased power and privilege (the power to determine the living standards of increasing proportions of the populace).

Our political/industrial class are rank opportunists, but they're very clever people and they play a long game.

IMHO.

@10

No worries, Given my own troubles with the iPhone keyboard, I cannto complain about other people's typos. But I appreciate the note. That was kind. Thank you.

Blogger DadOfTen October 06, 2015 10:22 AM  

22. FALPhil
One of my favorite subjects. Sorry. You have to suffer with me when I get the chance to talk about it.
How to cut the military to 1/4 its current size.
1. Cut the navy by having a larger 400 ship fleet with no aircraft carrier groups. At least 300 ships destroyer/frigate/corvette in size. Smaller is better. Subs and support craft are most of the other 100. No large ships.
2. Only protect ships flagged by the USA
3. Mercilessly destroy pirates and their supporters if they ever take over a US flagged ship.
4. Allow only 7 US military bases outside of the USA. I had a war college teacher tell me we really only need 3 - Sicily, Diego Garcia, and Okinawa. I am allowing extras for backups.
5. Stop all governmental foreign aid. 100% of it. Yes, this is a military option.
6. Disband 80% of the army troops at home, and keep most of the bases open but barely manned. Lots of reserve training going on.
7. Get rid of 50% of the Air Force (I just grabbed this number out of the air.)

That only gets us to 1/4 the current size if you count the foreign aid weapon.

Okay. I'm feeling better. Whew. I just solved the world's problems.

OpenID Jack Amok October 06, 2015 10:34 AM  

Put another way: he's completely atheistic with respect to the God's of the Copybook Headings...

In the Obama bungle we were promised an end to strife
which started by taking a toke and calling a man your wife
But though we had plenty of laws there was nothing our laws could stop
and the Gods of the Copybook Headings said "it's a long way down from the top"

But Nate is right, it goes way past Obama.

OpenID b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 October 06, 2015 11:13 AM  

Yes, our government is controlled by unelected third parties. But they didn't park their profits overseas just so that someone else could tax their profits instead.

That isn't quite going on here. This money is already taxed in Europe where it is earned. Well at least it would be if corporations didn't game the tax code. So part of what BEPS is trying to cut down are the double non-taxation entities. So in that sense yes they are trying to get money from American companies that are dodging paying taxes, and if they can get more than their fair share (whatever that is) they most certainly will.

The other thing that they seem to be calling for are tax breaks associated with local capital investment in high wage employment namely R&D associated with Intellectual Property.

Right now the US companies park their money earned in Europe in hedge funds that will invest back into the US but then they dodge paying the US income tax because they didn't bring it home through the parent company and they are waiting for a day when the tax code makes more sense (aka is reduced to zero) in order to bring it back. What the author here is worried about is that Europe might make it more attractive to just invest over there and forget ever bringing it back to the US.

Will Best

Blogger Danby October 06, 2015 11:26 AM  

@25 Dad of ten
You forgot;
8. $1000 refundable tax credit for any man that can show up at a national guard armory and put 50 rounds of .223 downrange, with 40 of them on target, with his own gun
9. Complete tax exemption for any guns or ammo in any standard US Army caliber.
10. Liability protection for shooting ranges
This country is invasion-proof. Let's keep it that way

Blogger J Van Stry October 06, 2015 11:33 AM  

I think this development was EXACTLY what those in the USA wanted to happen. Remember, they're all socialists, and they want everyone taxed to death by every government body.
I don't expect to see anyone in the Obama administration or the Democratic party fight this, I expect to see them, in fact, fully embrace it.

Blogger Ragin' Dave October 06, 2015 11:33 AM  

@26 - that was beautiful, man!

I'm so stealing that. Like right now.

Blogger DadOfTen October 06, 2015 12:16 PM  

@28. Danby

Oooh! Oooh! Okay. I just stole your next three as mine forever too. Officially now added.

OpenID Steve October 06, 2015 1:34 PM  

@28 tax credit for any man that can show up at a national guard armory and put 50 rounds of .223 downrange, with 40 of them on target

Military firing ranges need medics attending them, do you actually care about the numbers because it would probably just get signed off like Department of Nursing PT tests? While I was in the military there where a number of people that barely passed or passed on paper after 3 tries. Many of the military when I was in couldn't make your 40/50. You are also asking national guards people to give up playing video games/cards. -BGS

Blogger Danby October 06, 2015 3:35 PM  

@BGS
do you actually care about the numbers because it would probably just get signed off like Department of Nursing PT tests

No, not really. The accuracy is a fig leaf. The point is to have as many standard military firearms in circulation as possible. That's why it has to be his own gun.

But if it gets people out there practicing, that would be good too.

Blogger SciVo October 06, 2015 8:22 PM  

the Information Highway can be co-opted centrally and there is no alternative unfrastructure with the bandwidth to replace it.

I agree with everything else you said, but there's packet radio and also those laptops for third-world kids that make their own network. At the least we could make them have to jam us to stop the signal.

Blogger Cail Corishev October 06, 2015 9:24 PM  

the Information Highway can be co-opted centrally and there is no alternative unfrastructure with the bandwidth to replace it.

Not today, but check back tomorrow. (By the way, is "unfrastructure" a typo or a neologism? Because I kinda like it.)

We were building that alternative unfrastructure back in the early-to-mid 90s, when the Internet (NSFNET) was technically off-limits to commercial traffic and it wasn't clear what was going to happen with that. CIX was one possibility, and people were looking at all sorts of ways to connect to each other and get around things. (My ISP used a 9600-baud UUCP connection to a corporation across town to share some stuff back and forth, and a one-way satellite feed for most of Usenet.) When Congress privatized the backbone, all that became unnecessary, and the net exploded.

If you give people an easy-to-use, centralized, cheap solution that makes them happy, they'll gravitate to it and let the alternatives wither for the most part, and that's what happened. That's also what you see with the dominance of Google, Twitter, Facebook, and with the Web in general in recent years. But that doesn't mean alternatives are impossible, only that they haven't been perceived as needed.

If we could create an alternative back then -- and we would have -- we can surely create one now, with the improvements there have been in technology. You're right about the bandwidth, but once you subtract out all the selfies and Netflix watchers -- which a government would have no desire to stop -- it won't be so much.

Blogger Groot October 06, 2015 10:47 PM  

"the Law of Unintended Consequences"

For the definitive popular book on unintended consequences, I recommend Henry Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson. His thesis is that the difference between a good and a bad economist is that the former minds the unintended consequences. The central planner, on the other hand (as economists like to say), not so much.

@35, Cail Corishev:
"when the Internet (NSFNET) was technically off-limits to commercial traffic"

For a very good read on the creation of the Internet, from conception by Eisenhower's brain trust to the decriminalization of ecommerce, I recommend Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins Of The Internet by Katie Hafner and Matthew Lyon. Absolutely fascinating if you have anything of a technical bent.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts