GDP grew because after WW-II we were the only game in town. All the other industrialized nations had to physically rebuild after the war while the US enjoyed an industrial complex that was virtually unscathed. It was a one-time gift of wealth never to be repeated.
He’s willing to give up US citizenship and be a tax exile? Okay, that’s his decision. Personally, I think giving up the right of abode to save a few tens of millions on a net worth of billions is ridiculously short-sighted, but that’s my opinion.
What I really don’t understand is why this thread was started in the first place. I’m assuming it’s supposed to be some kind of fiscal-conservative gotcha, in which case I hope the OP has learned his lesson.
Are you under the impression that being an oil sheik is how wealthy foreigners make their money? Only a fraction of them are.
I agree 100% with this. The guy would have been fabulously wealthy after taxes so it is just a dick move and actually kind of sad.
Why? He’s been living there for 3 years and plans to stay. There’s really nothing dickish or sad about someone moving.
I concur. Why should he have to pay taxes to a country that he gets no support from except:
- The privilege of being ignored by the ambassador if he’s sentenced to caning for chewing gum.
- President Obama personally making sure Elizabeth II doesn’t go to Singapore and get all up in his grill.
Now he’s getting some attention on Capitol Hill: Senators Go After Eduardo Saverin, Facebook Co-Founder, For Dumping U.S. Passport, Avoiding Taxes (UPDATE) | HuffPost Latest News
I agree he is free to go live wherever he wants (and that will have him).
However, h made the move to renounce his US citizenship late last year.
The timing is extremely suggestive that he did it as a tax dodge.
Except his family came to the US and naturalized here to avoid trouble in Brazil and then he took advantage of the US system we all do for education and so on. Then he started a company in the US, the company got fabulously popular and he used the US court system to assert his rights to a piece of that pie which made him fabulously wealthy.
Other than that what did the US do for him? (Reminds me of the famous Monty Python skit on “What did the Romans ever do for us?”)
New York Times article on Eduardo Saverin, which notes, “Coming on the eve of the Facebook I.P.O., the news brought into sharp focus Mr. Saverin’s tax savings, which could easily exceed $100 million.” Also, he says, “This had nothing to do with taxes. I was born in Brazil, I was an American citizen for about 10 years. I thought of myself as a global citizen.”
Also, Bloomberg thinks he might save $67 million, although the exit tax will be about $365 million.
No “defense” is required. It’s a perfectly sensible law within the authority of the US government. As a practical matter, nothing forces Americans living abroad to pay US income taxes. They just shouldn’t expect a warm welcome when they return.
shrug If they want to enjoy the benefits of being an American citizen, such as they are, they suck it up and deal with the law. Nothing prevents New Zealand, or the UK, or even Somalia from enacting a similar law to protect its tax base.
Bet he didn’t mention that during his naturalization interviews.
…except of course, for the fact that every other country has determined that such a law would be stupid.
Interesting that argumentum ad mundum is so compelling in this case, yet seemingly meaningless when applied to, say, universal health care.
If he was a minor when his parents naturalized, he was automatically naturalized without interview. I don’t hold him responsible for this decision any more than I would hold the child of illegal aliens responsible for their parents entering the country illegally.
I think there might be one or two other countries that tax worldwide. Don’t forget the 100K expat exemption (your first 100K of foreign earned income is not subject to US income tax).
I checked. People usually claim it for Libya or Philippines. That’s incorrect. Could not find any other country doing it.
He’d be more concerned with capital gains which is taxed as an American overseas… even if the money has no relation to the USA.
Not if he renounces citizenship. Then he pays taxes on the built in gain and then he is done.
Check for South Korea.
No other country’s money is the de facto global reserve currency, either. Does that mean the US is stupid for leveraging that status in government borrowing?
No, it just means other countries couldn’t get away with it. It’s not stupid. In fact, by any objective measure, it’s a very clever move.
Minors are not automatically naturalized when their parents are naturalized. They are automatically eligible for residency, which is not the same thing.
They can’t? Why not?
I’m still a Canadian, but I don’t live in Canada and I don’t pay taxes there. Why would I? I don’t earn my money there, I don’t take advantage of any perceived benefits of living there.
Some of the comments here remind me of this cartoon.
