FATCA is a reporting requirement used against US citizens holding money in offshore accounts. It has no teeth with respect to collecting. They are powerless to collect, except in some instances a persons SS benefit, and typically, those people owe no taxes anyway, so they would renounce, file the final return, and there would be nothing the US could do thereafter.
Arresting RoCA citizens? You realize in the worst case scenario, not filing and not paying taxes are 2 different things. One can be prosecuted criminally, the other civil. If I owe the IRS $20,000 what are they going to seize? My Chevrolet Cadaver Mk II? My CA house? This would require a treaty between the 2 countries allowing it, and I’m betting the IRS isn’t willing to employ a new staff to chase down 19 million wage earners, then sort out those who renounced citizenship and owe nothing more than a “I’m done with you US tax return” and then put out an arrest warrant, wait, can’t be arrested for non-payment of taxes, that would be debtor prison.
If California becomes a separate nation, they will negotiate treaties, treaties for extradition of violent felons for example. Treaties for income data sharing seem reasonable and beneficial to CA to some extent. Treaties for using California’s land for the US military bases, flying war planes over California. Treaties for storing nuclear weapons on US ships using CA’s ports. I’m sure somewhere in all those treaties will be a “keep your hands off our citizens” provision. I’m sure this will be considered when determining a fair lease value for CA’s lands and assets.
I imagine California’s 7* Panamax ports will remain useful to the US and that there will be considerable give and take with respect to shipping US goods to and from those ports.
I forgot about Port of Hueneme — only deepwater port between Los Angeles and San Francisco, and the only military deepwater port between San Diego Bay and Puget Sound. I’m betting the US would be willing to give up quite a bit to secure that one along with the one in San Diego.
But it’s not all roses and clover. We’d lose the 4th of July as a national holiday.
There are lots of teeth for collecting taxes, like revocation of passport, and arrest upon entering the US, and denial of SS and other benefits. What good does US citizenship do you if you can’t get a US passport, can’t enter the US, and can’t collect benefits from the US? You may as will give up your citizenship - which destroys the idea of Calexiters being able to keep dual CA/US citizenship.
They’ll seize you and anything you’re carrying when you cross into the US and hold you until it’s all sorted out. If you don’t plan to cross into the US, then what’s the purpose of retaining US citizenship?
If renouncing citizenship is part of the plan, then the whole ‘calexit means you can keep your US citizenship’ is bunk. So it seems like you’re finally agreeing that idea is without merit.
Right, because no one has ever been arrested for tax evasion, that would be a debtor prison! Just refuse to file income tax returns and refuse to disclose any information about your income, I’m sure it will all be OK in the end!
Just out of curiosity, are RoCA citizens going to pay the 25.5% non-resident alien tax on their Social Security benefits?
Or we could just say “the hell with it” and not pay the benefits, like we do with countries like Cuba and North Korea. What are you going to do - invade?
You keep trying to eat your cake and have it too. Either Californians will retain their US citizenship, in which case they will pay their taxes (and get their Social Security and pay all applicable taxes) and every bank they do business with will report their info to the IRS. Or they will renounce their citizenship and try to not pay their non-resident alien taxes, in which case they don’t get their Social Security benefits and they can’t enter the US.
Or this whole secession thing is a fantasy composed of equal parts wishful thinking and horseshit.
Sounds like a tariff might be in order for all goods shipped through CA via the Panamax ports. That should more than cover it.
25.5 % tax…
*you may be exempt from this tax (or subject to a lower rate) by treaty.
*
Guess what, treaty…
You’re pitching softballs dude, easy to hit softballs.
What you don’t get is that we don’t want your cake, let alone eat it. I honestly suspect that 2 years from now, the thought of renouncing their US citizenship is going to be crossing everyone’s mind. If the current administration gets another 4 years in 2020, I’m pretty sure California won’t be the only state trying to leave what’s left of the US.
I usually take anyone throwing out the old “vast majority” measurement of just about anything as a sure sign the person is speaking from their nether reasons.
Just trying to understand your evolving position. Does this mean that #CalExit is ok with foregoing the $6B in SS benefits Californians currently receive?
Yeah, I’ve noticed a distinct lack of any actual cites supporting the ‘vast majority’ figure. A quick look Wiki of ports in the US has the single port of South Louisiana and the single port of Houston each handling more than all of California’s ports put together.
Port of Humboldt Bay — (aka Port of Eureka) the only deepwater port in California north of San Francisco Bay
Port of Richmond
Port of Stockton — California’s farthest-inland deepwater port.
Port of Oakland — channel is thirty feet deep and eight hundred feet wide.
Port of Redwood City — resulting from dredging the mouth of Redwood Creek
Port of Hueneme — only deepwater port between Los Angeles and San Francisco, and the only military deepwater port between San Diego Bay and Puget Sound
Port of Los Angeles — busiest port in the United States.
Port of Long Beach — one of the busiest container ports in the world.
Port of San Diego — home to the bulk of the United States Navy Pacific Carrier Fleet. Only the first nine miles (14 km) of the bay are accessible to Panamax vessels.
and what makes you so sure those treaties will be agreed upon? I mean, simply saying the word “treaties” doesn’t mean they’ll happen, nor does it guarantee they’ll all work in California’s favor.
I’m sure California will have many things the US would want access to, or the ability to use, not to mention treaties with respect to extradition of dangerous felons, etc.
Since you seem to still be throwing raw data out without any analysis for how much negotiating power it potentially gives the RoCA or your previous claim.
The EU countries, Canada, and Mexico combined for 1.888 trillion USD of trade in 2014 against total trade of 3.968 trillion USD - 47.6% of US trade. There may well be some shipping along the coast from Canada and Mexico but it’s at least a quick and dirty lowball estimate since we’re also excluding African and Middle Eastern trade via the Atlantic along with ports in WA that handle Pacific trade routes. A lot of the Central and South American trade comes through the Gulf coast as well. The case is looking extremely weak for CA handling the “vast majority” of US trade. Even a slim majority is looking pretty tough. Large minority of trade seems to be a likelier description of CA’s shipping role.
It’s worse if you just consider exports because the Pacific handles the trading partner we have the biggest trade imbalance with - China. In a political environment where both Sanders and Trump got quite a bit of support for trade protectionist positions the administration negotiating with your new Republic might not care too much about cheap Chinese imports. For exports the EU, Canada, and Mexico combine for 828 billion USD out of a total 1,620 billion USB in exports - 51%.
CA isn’t without any negotiating power. Your position, pretty consistently, is that some you have some special power that means the rest of us have no choice but to give you everything you want. It’s almost Trumpian. CA will get amazing deals…YUGE deals…better than the US gives literally everyone else on the planet …on everything.
You don’t have that much negotiating power. Not even close.
Negotiating power? I doubt that’s any problem at all.
Port of Los Angeles, the busiest container port in the US.
Port of Long Beach, the second-busiest container port in the US.
Port of Oakland, the fifth busiest container port in the US.
3 of the Top 5 ports in the US are in CA. 1, 2, and 5.
Not to mention 2 of the 3 west coast deepwater military ports are in CA. The next closest is in Northern Washington. Not to mention the infrastructure to support those bases. I’d call that a fairly necessary military asset.
From the Wiki articles on each port, as well as the home page of #1 and #2.
I didn’t consider Mexico, but San Diego County has two major border crossings, and Imperial county has 2 also.
We’ve got quite a bit of strengths to bring to the table too. Want to ever join the UN? We can prevent that in perpetuity if you don’t make us a good enough offer.
Containers aren’t a good measure since they can vary greatly in value. Your link earlier, as I pointed out, showed about a quarter of the containers going through CA’s two busiest ports aren’t really trade. They are administrative overhead to support trade since they are empty. Value of trade goods in empty containers - zero USD.
It’s probably also useful to break out how many of those containers carry goods that start or end in CA. It’s admittedly a populous state with a big economy. The rest of us don’t care about trade moving through your ports that doesn’t involve us. I will almost guarantee our negotiators will know how much is CA specific trade.
It might be useful if your movement paid attention to numbers that are directly relevant to how strong your negotiating position after secession will be. I would. I won’t be afraid to write my elected officials to stick it to get the aboslute best deal for the remaining 49 states either…no matter what effect that has on CA.
Ah, you’re back with your “the US has a prison gang mentality, once you join, you’ll never get out alive.” CalExit has no intention or desire for violence in this matter. We really don’t need to go over this again.
What happened last time a state seceded and tried to seize US military assets? But yeah, keep believing that you can shame the US for acting like a functional country with statements like this:
Threatening to seize US military bases indicates either an intention or desire for violence, or a complete divorce from reality.
