U.S. Hikes Fee To Renounce Citizenship By 422%
Over the last two years, the U.S. has had a spike in expatriations. It isn’t exactly Ellis Island in reverse, but it’s more than a dribble. With global tax reporting and FATCA, the list of theindividuals who renounced is up. For 2013, there was a 221% increase, with record numbers of Americans renouncing. The Treasury Department is required to publish a quarterly list, but these numbers are under-stated, some say considerably.
The presence or absence of tax motivation is no longer relevant, but that could change. AfterFacebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin departed for Singapore, Senators Chuck Schumer and Bob Casey introduced a bill to double the exit tax to 30% for anyone leaving the U.S. for tax reasons. That hasn’t happened, but taxes are still a big issue for many.
To leave America, you generally must prove 5 years of U.S. tax compliance. If you have a net worth greater than $2 million or average annual net income tax for the 5 previous years of $157,000 or more for 2014 (that’s tax, not income), you pay an exit tax. It is a capital gain tax as if you sold your property when you left. At least there’s an exemption of $680,000 for 2014. Long-term residents giving up a Green Card can be required to pay the tax too.
Now, the State Department interim rule just raised the fee for renunciation of U.S. citizenship to $2,350 from $450. Critics note that it’s more than twenty times the average level in other high-income countries. The State Department says it’s about demand on their services and all the extra workload they have to process people who are on their way out.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2014/08/28/u-s-hikes-fee-to-renounce-citizenship-by-422/
Tag: Obamanomics
Companies find other ways to move offshore and avoid U.S. taxes
Companies find other ways to move offshore and avoid U.S. taxes
AUGUST 31, 2014 LAST UPDATED: SUNDAY, AUGUST 31, 2014, 1:21 AM
BY ZACHARY R. MIDER
BLOOMBERG NEWS
THE RECORD
* Some firms have left the U.S. system not through inversions but through buyouts by investment funds
NEW YORK — There’s more than one way for a U.S. company to avoid taxes by claiming a foreign address.
Consider the business founded in 1916 as General Plate Co., a maker of sensors and controls for everything from Fords and Frigidaires to the spaceship that first carried Americans to the moon. While its top executives are still based in Attleboro, Mass., it’s now known as Sensata Technologies Holding NV of the Netherlands.
Sensata didn’t become Dutch by using the strategy known as “inversion” that has alarmed President Obama and that the U.S. Treasury Department and some Democrats in Congress are trying to curb. That technique, which involves reincorporating overseas without a change in majority ownership, has helped more than 40 U.S. companies lower their tax bills.
Instead, Sensata is one of at least 13 firms that have left the U.S. tax system through a sale to an investment fund, according to a tally by Bloomberg News. Although these companies have a combined market value of about $75 billion, this tax-avoidance strategy has gotten less attention in Washington than inversions and may be harder to discourage.
These buyouts mean profits for the U.S. private equity firms like Boston-based Bain Capital that orchestrated them. Bain earned more than $3 billion after it took Sensata public as a Dutch company in 2010, with an effective tax rate about one-tenth of some competing manufacturers.
Shifting to a foreign tax domicile “is looked at hard in every private equity deal,” said Joan Arnold, a tax partner at Pepper Hamilton in Philadelphia. “They will be interested in what they can do to minimize taxes and maximize sale price.”
– See more at: https://www.northjersey.com/news/business/tax-avoiders-get-creative-1.1078561#sthash.j4QYTjZn.dpuf
Many Native Americans do not find the Redskins name offensive, and instead are more concerned with other issues facing their community
Obama’s Naive Belief in Predetermined History
Obama’s Naive Belief in Predetermined History
By Dave the Sage on August 29, 2014 • ( 1 )
– By Victor Davis Hanson –
In his therapeutic 2009 Cairo speech, Obama outlined all sorts of Islamic intellectual and technological pedigrees, several of which were undeserved. He exaggerated Muslim contributions to printing and medicine, for example, and was flat-out wrong about the catalysts for the European Renaissance and Enlightenment.
He also believes history follows some predetermined course, as if things always get better on their own. Obama often praises those he pronounces to be on the “right side of history.” He also chastises others for being on the “wrong side of history” – as if evil is vanished and the good thrives on autopilot.
When in 2009 millions of Iranians took to the streets to protest the thuggish theocracy, they wanted immediate U.S. support. Instead, Obama belatedly offered them banalities suggesting that in the end, they would end up “on the right side of history.” Iranian reformers may indeed end up there, but it will not be because of some righteous inanimate force of history, or the prognostications of Barack Obama.
Obama often parrots Martin Luther King Jr.’s phrase about the arc of the moral universe bending toward justice. But King used that metaphor as an incentive to act, not as reassurance that matters will follow an inevitably positive course.
Another of Obama’s historical refrains is his frequent sermon about behavior that doesn’t belong in the 21st century. At various times he has lectured that the barbarous aggression of Vladimir Putin or ISIS has no place in our century and will “ultimately fail” – as if we are all now sophisticates of an age that has at last transcended retrograde brutality and savagery. …
If Obama believes that evil should be absent in the 21st century, or that the arc of the moral universe must always bend toward justice, or that being on the wrong side of history has consequences, then he may think inanimate forces can take care of things as we need merely watch.
In truth, history is messier. Unfortunately, only force will stop seventh-century monsters like ISIS from killing thousands more innocents.
https://theconservativecitizen.com/2014/08/29/obamas-naive-belief-in-predetermined-history/
Why A Six-Figure Salary No Longer Means You’re Rich
Why A Six-Figure Salary No Longer Means You’re Rich
in Investing by Holly Johnson
I was born in 1980, and I still remember the days when “bringing in six figures” was a sign of extreme wealth and success. It was more than enough to buy the perfect house with a white picket fence, after all, and achieving that sort of income implied a certain level of status that nearly everyone aspired to. You could even say that a six-figure salary was seen as the real “American dream,” simply because earning that much money meant that you had “made it,” at least in financial terms. As a child, I distinctly remember dreaming of a six-figure income myself, and fantasizing about all of the amazing things I could do with so much money.
Times have changed since then, but the public’s perception of a six-figure salary hasn’t necessarily changed with it. With the median household income stuck at around $53,093 in 2014, an annual salary of nearly twice that still seems like more than enough money to succeed and thrive in any economy, no matter the circumstances. However, a convergence of factors have fundamentally changed what it means to rake in a “six-figure salary” in America, and many families who look rich on paper are merely struggling to get ahead along with everyone else.
Why Six Figures Isn’t What it Used to Be
Earning a six-figure salary is still a sign of status and success, but it no longer guarantees a lifetime of wealth like it once did, especially in certain parts of the country. A recent analysis by USA Today goes even further to say that the average price of living the American dream has now risen to $130,000 per year due the rising costs of nearly everything. The authors of the study claim that the American dream is about “finding and pursuing a rewarding career, leading a healthy and personally fulfilling life, and being able to retire in comfort,” adding that only 1 in 8 households in the U.S. currently earn enough to achieve those goals. But, what exactly has changed?
https://blog.personalcapital.com/investing/six-figure-salary/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Twitter-blogpost&utm_content=WhyASixFigureSalaryNoLongerMeansYoureRich
Blackberry Blackout! Nets Refuse to Report That IRS Destroyed Lerner’s Phone After Probe Began
Blackberry Blackout! Nets Refuse to Report That IRS Destroyed Lerner’s Phone After Probe Began
By Geoffrey Dickens | August 26, 2014 | 11:12
On the heels of a Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyer admitting to Judicial Watch that Lois Lerner’s missing e-mails do exist comes another stunning revelation.
On Monday evening the New York Observer reported “the IRS destroyed Lerner’s Blackberry after it knew her computer had crashed and after a Congressional inquiry was well underway.” Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) network coverage of this fishy behavior on the part of the IRS and Lerner? 0 seconds.
There hasn’t been a single story on the Blackberry destruction or the DOJ lawyer’s admission of the existence of Lerner’s e-mails on any of the Monday evening or Tuesday morning shows on ABC, CBS or NBC.
All three morning shows on Tuesday did find time (5 minutes, 32 seconds) to cover the altercation on a plane caused by an unruly passenger upset about the “Knee Defender” product intruding on her personal space.
On August 25, the New York Observer reported the following:
“The IRS filing in federal Judge Emmet Sullivan’s court reveals shocking new information. The IRS destroyed Lerner’s Blackberry AFTER it knew her computer had crashed and after a Congressional inquiry was well underway. As an IRS official declared under the penalty of perjury, the destroyed Blackberry would have contained the same emails (both sent and received) as Lois Lerner’s hard drive.”
Read more: https://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2014/08/26/blackberry-blackout-nets-refuse-report-shocking-revelation-irs-des#ixzz3BblSBfgl
Why Isn’t Monetary Pumping Helping the Economy?
Why Isn’t Monetary Pumping Helping the Economy?
Mises Daily: Monday, August 25, 2014 by Frank Shostak
Despite all the massive monetary pumping over the past six years and the lowering of interest rates to almost zero most commentators have expressed disappointment with the pace of economic growth. For instance, the yearly rate of growth of the European Monetary Union (EMU) real GDP fell to 0.7 percent in Q2 from 0.9 percent in the previous quarter. In Q1 2007 the yearly rate of growth stood at 3.7 percent. In Japan the yearly rate of growth of real GDP fell to 0 percent in Q2 from 2.7 percent in Q1 and 5.8 percent in Q3 2010.

In the US the yearly rate of growth of real GDP stood at 2.4 percent in Q2 against 1.9 percent in the prior quarter. Note that since Q1 2010 the rate of growth followed a sideways path of around 2.2 percent. The exception is the UK where the growth momentum of GDP shows strengthening with the yearly rate of growth closing at 3.1 percent in Q2 from 3 percent in Q1. Observe however, that the yearly rate of growth in Q3 2007 stood at 4.3 percent.
https://mises.org/daily/6853/
The Italian Job: How Borrowing And Printing Lead To An Economic Dead End
The Italian Job: How Borrowing And Printing Lead To An Economic Dead End
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/21/2014 12:33 -0400
Earlier this week Bloomberg published a devastating chart showing real hourly wage growth for the first 60 months of every cycle going back to 1949. The 11 cycle average gain was 9% and the largest was 19% a half century back.
Fast forward to the 60 months of ZIRP and QE since the Great Recession officially ended in June 2009, however, and you get a drastically different picture: Real hourly wages have risen by just 0.5%, and in the great scheme of things that’s a rounding error.
Surely the above chart is also flat-out proof that massive money printing doesn’t work. After all, reflating wages, jobs and incomes is what the monetary politburo claims it’s all about. Indeed, the Fed has insouciantly cast a blind eye to the massive bubbles building everywhere in the financial system, and has kept money market rates relentlessly at zero for six years running on the grounds that it is not yet done “stimulating” the labor market.
So why does this abysmally failed and dangerous experiment continue unabated—as Yellen will undoubtedly confirm at Jackson Hole? Self-evidently, it is irresistibly convenient to both Wall Street and Washington. The former gorges on a massive diet of carry trade gambling windfalls thanks to ZIRP and the Greenspan/Bernanke/Yellen “put”; and the latter gets a fiscal get-out-of-jail-free card owing to the Fed’s massive repression of interest rates. Indeed, with the public debt now topping $17.7 trillion, the implicit (and fraudulent) debt service relief from current ultra-low interest rates amounts to upwards of $500 billion per year.
Stated differently, where there should be extreme caution on Wall Street, there is actually irrational exuberance beyond Alan Greenspan’s wildest imagination back in December 1996. And where there should be fiscal panic in Washington owing to prospective red ink of another $15 trillion over the next decade (under “un-rosy scenario”), there is unmitigated and universal complacency.
The evil of monetary central planning, of course, is exactly what is unfolding: it drastically distorts pricing signals and thereby sows the seeds of eventual financial correction shocks and the consequent economic disorder. But there is something else, and its worse. Namely, the addiction to money printing and artificial debt fueled stimulus has become so deeply entrenched in the Wall Street-Washington corridor that the mainstream narrative has lost any semblance of historical perspective and realistic appreciation of the dead-end path on which the system is now embarked.
The monumental extent of monetary expansion and debt accretion since the turn of the 21st Century, for example, goes unrecognized, and is assumed to be merely a permanent and sustainable feature of the financial landscape. And that blindness might even be understandable had it been accompanied by an unusual surge of prosperity of the “party now, pay later” variety. In fact, however, the core metrics of prosperity——real GDP growth, breadwinner employment, investment in productive assets and real household incomes—-have all gone in the opposite direction, having fallen drastically below all historical norms.
The contrasts below are dispositive. Real GDP growth during the last 14 years has averaged only 1.8%—-barely half the average rate during the prior 50 years. Likewise, breadwinner jobs are still 5% below their turn of the century level; real net investment in plant and equipment is 20% below its late 1990s levels; and real median household income is down by 5%.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-21/italian-job-how-borrowing-and-printing-lead-economic-dead-end
A Lesson in Economic Analysis from the Minimum Wage Debate
A Lesson in Economic Analysis from the Minimum Wage Debate
Mises Daily: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 by Ken Zahringer
In the ebb and flow of interventionist politics, there are some issues that surface periodically regardless of how many times and how completely they are proven to be harmful to the very people they are purported to help. Currently the tide is once again carrying the minimum wage to the forefront of collective attention. Supporters of this and similar measures often use straw-man arguments, like the one in the picture below.
I discovered this ad through one of my friends who shared it on Facebook. It was originally posted on July 12, 2014 on the website of OurTime.org. I propose to deconstruct this pseudo-argument here, pointing out its major errors. I do this not to convince hard-core supporters of raising the minimum wage that it is a bad idea; I doubt that is possible by any means. Rather, this can be a short lesson for those interested in sound economic analysis in how to proceed when confronted by opposing arguments buttressed by seemingly sound statistics.
The Ceteris Paribus Principle
The statement in the box is worded rather ambiguously, which is typical for this type of argument. It can be interpreted two different ways. On the one hand, it could be claiming that the minimum wage hike caused the increase in employment. This is a clear violation of ceteris paribus (i.e., all other things being equal or held constant), which is at the core of any good analysis and cannot be stressed often enough. In order for that interpretation to be valid, we must assume that all states are identical in all other respects and that the increase in the minimum wage was the only economic condition that changed. This is clearly not the case. States use a variety of policy initiatives to encourage job growth; focusing on this one factor ignores significant heterogeneity among states.
In its weaker form, the statement could merely be claiming that jobs were created in spite of the increase. This is obvious and trivial. In order for this interpretation to be meaningful we must assume that the minimum wage is the biggest kid on the block, the overriding factor that swamps all others. It’s all or nothing; either it kills all job growth or it’s not a factor. This is what makes the argument a straw man. It is overly simplified and no one who opposes the minimum wage takes the position it attempts to refute. The minimum wage is simply one factor among many affecting the job market; real-world outcomes are a result of a constellation of factors, each playing its part. But this is not the only thing wrong with this version of the argument — it gets better (or worse).
https://mises.org/daily/6854/A-Lesson-in-Economic-Analysis-from-the-Minimum-Wage-Debate
Why It Makes Sense for Burger King to Become a Canadian Company
Why It Makes Sense for Burger King to Become a Canadian Company
Stephen Moore / @StephenMoore / August 25, 2014
How many iconic American companies have to leave or threaten to leave these shores for foreign lands before Washington acts to fix our anti-growth tax system and keep firms, profits, and jobs here in the U.S.?
Burger King became the latest Fortune 100 company to announce it is looking to leave. The company is considering a deal to merge with Canadian restaurant chain Tim Hortons and move its headquarters north across the border. The multi-billion dollar deal would make the $11.4 billion hamburger company now based in Miami a Canadian firm valued at more than $21 billion. The technical term for this transaction is an “inversion.”
Why is it happening? The combined federal and state corporate income tax rate in Florida is 38.6 percent, near the highest in the world and more than a third higher than the combined national and provincial rate of 28.0 percent in Ontario, Canada. This is costing American workers jobs and the U.S. capital investment.
No surprise that tax shares for both Tim Hortons and Burger King soared nearly 20 percent at the prospect of less of the company’s profits being taken in taxes—a boon to investors of more than $3 billion in one day. So far this year companies like Pfizer, Walgreens, AbbVie, and others have investigated similar moves to lower their tax bills.
Expect a blizzard more of these tax moves if the U.S. corporate tax isn’t reduced quickly to at most the average in the industrialized world of 25 percent. Better yet would be to abolish the corporate tax altogether and tax the shareholders on these profits. This would cause a flood of companies to come to the U.S. rather than leave.
The hamburger is a quintessential American food. What could be more unpatriotic than giving firms like Burger King a financial incentive to leave the U.S. because of the high tax rate here? Thanks, Congress!
https://dailysignal.com/2014/08/25/makes-sense-burger-king-become-canadian-company/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
Warren Buffett to Invest in Burger King’s Planned Deal for Tim Hortons
Berkshire Hathaway Expected to Provide About 25% of Financing, Thrusting Billionaire Into U.S. Tax Debate
No one to blame but ourselves
No one to blame but ourselves
AUGUST 24, 2014 LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, AUGUST 25, 2014, 12:16 AM
SUBURBAN TRENDS
Lee Hamilton, director of Indiana University’s Center on Congress, recently sent us a missive about why government fails all too often.
“There’s ample cause for concern,” Hamilton notes. “The VA appointments scandal; the botched launch of the Affordable Care Act; the 28 years of missed inspections that led to the explosion of the fertilizer plant in West, Texas; scandals at the General Services Administration and the Secret Service … There’s a long and dispiriting list of occasions when the federal government has fallen short.”
The bad news is there are no quick fixes. It begins but doesn’t end at the ballot box. We also have to let our political leaders know what we are thinking, and that’s not just those elected to high office but our local leaders. Look around at local politics and you might be surprised about who has influence. Perhaps not surprisingly those who have more of say in what gets done are the very same people who are out in the community volunteering both civically and politically. As important is that they are involved and they stay informed.
People bad mouth the Tea Party and while we disagree with their positions on many issues, it should be noted that they show up, push their agenda and have been effective in pushing the political scrum in the direction they favor.
Contrast this with a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC Poll, which found that a majority of Americans are feeling gloomy. The poll found that 71 percent say the U.S. is “on the wrong track,” and 60 percent say it’s in a “state of decline.” Only 2 percent are “very satisfied” with the political system, while 79 percent are “very” or “somewhat” dissatisfied. Only 3 percent are “very satisfied” with the economy, while 64 percent are “somewhat” or “very” dissatisfied.
We have to wonder how many of the gloomy bothered to vote in the recent primary elections or how many will even vote in November’s elections. If you want the people who are pulling the strings, setting tax policies, funding key programs, and passing out pork to tackle the myriad of problems facing this nation, this state or your community, you have to vote and you have to participate.
– See more at: https://www.northjersey.com/news/politics/no-one-to-blame-but-ourselves-1.1075226#sthash.Yy8Qy2EQ.dpuf
U.S. stance on Israeli-Palestinian conflict weakens Israel
ROBERT B. YUDIN
Opinion: U.S. stance on Israeli-Palestinian conflict weakens Israel
August 21, 2014 Last updated: Thursday, August 21, 2014, 1:21 AM
By ROBERT B. YUDIN
The Record
SINCE THE founding of Israel in 1948, it has been the bedrock of U.S. foreign policy to support Israel politically, economically and militarily. The one inviolate rule was that Israel must always retain its qualitative military superiority. Until now, both political parties have in a very non-partisan manner adhered to this principal.
A recent Gallup poll shows a change in this thinking. When asked about the current conflict between Israel and Hamas and specifically “Americans’ Views of Israel’s Action in Current Middle East Conflict,” 31 percent of those identifying themselves as Democrats felt Israel was justified while 47 percent felt Israel was not justified. Among those identifying themselves as Republicans 65 percent felt Israel was justified and 21 percent felt unjustified.
When you couple this with President Obama’s freezing military shipments to Israel in the middle of a shooting war with a terrorist organization – Hamas – many people have a right to be concerned.
Hamas has stated in its charter that it is dedicated to the annihilation of Israel and to the death of world Jewry. To date, Hamas has fired over 3,000 missiles into Israel as well as using tunnels into Israel for the purpose of killing Israelis.
The freezing of military shipments indicates a basic change in Obama’s policy to Israel. Reuters is quoted as saying that State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf says it is not a diminution of U.S. support of Israel. Yet actions speak louder than words, and withholding delivery of munitions speaks volumes.
In addition, Obama says Israel has a right to defend itself but that he is concerned with civilian casualties. I hear that as code for saying Israel does not have a right to defend itself because if Hamas puts missiles in the basement and purposively places civilians on the first and second floor when Israel, in defending itself, sends a missile into that basement to take out Hamas missiles before they are fired into Israel, the civilians on the first and second floor will become casualties. That is what Israel means when it says Hamas uses civilians to shield its missiles.
Leading up to World War II, few people believed Hitler when it became clear what his intentions were toward the Jews – it was the Holocaust. How can anyone fault Israelis for believing Hamas when its own charter calls for the same Holocaust?
Whether it is Hamas, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, al-Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood, their goals are the same: the destruction of Judaic-Christian religions, the destruction of our way of life and the domination of the world through the establishment of a Worldwide Caliphate.
Israel’s fight against Hamas is also our fight. If Israel loses, we are next.
Robert B. Yudin, a resident of Wyckoff, is chairman of the Bergen County Republican Organization.
The truth about libertarians, police and Ferguson’s fury
The truth about libertarians, police and Ferguson’s fury
By John Stossel
Published August 20, 2014
FoxNews.com
Libertarians warned for years that government is force, that government always grows and that America’s police have become too much like an occupying army.
We get accused of being paranoid, but we look less paranoid after heavily armed police in Ferguson, Missouri, tear gassed peaceful protesters, arrested journalists and stopped some journalists from entering the town.
One week before the rioting began, Fox News aired my documentary on the militarization of law enforcement, “Policing America.”
That show didn’t stop some left-wing commentators from making the bizarre claim that libertarians like me have been silent about Ferguson.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/08/20/libertarians-police-and-ferguson-fury/
Average Price of Ground Beef Hits All-Time High
Average Price of Ground Beef Hits All-Time High
August 19, 2014 – 11:10 AM
By Ali Meyer
(CNSNews.com) – The average price for all types of ground beef per pound hit its all-time high — $3.884 per pound — in the United States in July, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
That was up from $3.880 per pound in June. A year ago, in July 2013, the average price for a pound of ground beef was $3.459 per pound. Since then, the average price for a pound of ground beef has gone up 42.1 cents–or about 12 percent.
Five years ago, in July 2009, the average price for a pound of ground beef was $2.147, according to the BLS. In those five years, the average price has climbed by $1.737 per pound–or almost 81 percent.
https://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/average-price-ground-beef-hits-all-time-high
Dershowitz: Perry Indictment ‘What Happens in Totalitarian Societies’
Dershowitz: Perry Indictment ‘What Happens in Totalitarian Societies’
The indictment of Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry over abuse of power and coercion is reminiscent of the way that political dissent was handled in the Soviet Union, legal scholar and Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax TV’s “America’s Forum.”
Dershowitz, who make clear he would never vote for Rick Perry, said Monday the governor’s indictment was driven by politics and is representative of “what happens in totalitarian societies.”
He said disagreement with Perry’s actions is “not the basis of what a criminal charge should be,” adding that Americans have the ability to “vote against him” if they don’t like his actions.
Dershowitz, who calls himself a “liberal Democrat,” said he doesn’t “approve of [Perry’s] views on most matters, certainly on social matters.” However, he said Perry’s actions were “not the basis of what a criminal charge should be,” and explained the indictment was “political in nature, and that’s why I’m so opposed to it.”
https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Alan-Dershowitz-Rick-Perry-indictment-Lehmberg/2014/08/18/id/589413/#ixzz3AnTNOJv8

















