#PanamaPapers

I was on Twitter yesterday and #CurseDavidCameron was trending. It was the best place on the Internet that day imo. People were really upset.

So David Cameron says that he paid taxes on the sale of his assets. OK so if that's true, and he doesn't own anything that he doesn't pay taxes on (according to the article I just linked to) then what is everyone's problem with him?

I genuinely don't understand. Someone explain this to me please.
 
I was on Twitter yesterday and #CurseDavidCameron was trending. It was the best place on the Internet that day imo. People were really upset.

So David Cameron says that he http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35994283. OK so if that's true, and he doesn't own anything that he doesn't pay taxes on (according to the article I just linked to) then what is everyone's problem with him?

I genuinely don't understand. Someone explain this to me please.

Because idiots are blaming him for the actions of his father.
 
They want to kill all the offshores territories and keep Delaware and Nevada as "the safest place" to open a company and hide your money.

You misunderstand why companies incorporate in DE and NV. You can not hide money within US, as any money within US has to follow US banking regulations. Any money in DE and NV pretty much gets taxed the same as money anywhere else in US.
 
Elaborate more on this. Delaware and Nevada is the best place to open a company but how about the bank account that all this money will go into?

It doesn't affect money or banking. The reason why companies incorporate in DE is because laws of the state that you incorporate in are the laws you litigate by if there is a problem. DE corporate laws are very favorable to the management. For example, by using DE laws you can make it really difficult for outsiders to take over a company and force disputes to be arbitrated rather than litigated.
 
Wait for it... there is way more data to come... Sueddeutsche Zeitung correspondent was asked why there are no people from the US and he said just that: Wait for it :).

I wouldn't expect too many A list people on the list because US people can use Virgin Islands or Guam which has the tax benefits but still within US territory, along with local government that will totally let you set up your own bank and send money to it if you want.
 
Why would US "allies" be on the list when they have access to their own tax havens (Guam, USVI, Isle of Man, Cayman Islands, etc) without having to go through Panama? Only US "enemies" would be on it, because they're the ones trying to hide money from US and its allies' banking regulators.

Jackie Chan is totally an enemy of the US. #conspiracy-theories
 
You can not hide money within US, as any money within US has to follow US banking regulations.

In general*, the US does not report to other countries what their citizens own in US banks. So, the US is effectively the biggest offshore location for non-US citizens.

*See the FATCA rules for each country.
 
Yes, but US has bilateral agreements with a bunch of countries so tax authorities can look into each other's bank accounts. I withdrew money from Korean banks specifically for this reason.

Usually the IGAs the US signs are "in name" unilateral while de facto one-sided. Here's the updated agreement: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-c...nts/FATCA-Agreement-South Korea-6-10-2015.pdf

Go to article 2 and see that:

a) The Koreans have to supply the US with how much money the account has at the end of the year.

while

b) The US has to supply the Koreans with the amount of interest the acount has been credited at the end of the year and not the account balance.

See? ;)
 
I wonder how many BHW people got caught because of this :D
But anyway, ICIJ (people which helped leak) is funded by the elite rockefeller foundation, gates foundation, USAID, etc.
They surely have their own agenda
 
Taxes. Fuck taxes.

As a future economist (still in the school) I really believe there should be taxes. However, what my country (Croatia) is doing to us is simply stupid. I don't have a company and I "have to" pay taxes which are around 55-ish%.

I learnt everything by myself, I have invested every single penny of my money. I don't really want to give 55% of that to my country who has done nothing, but slowed me down.
 
As a future economist (still in the school) I really believe there should be taxes.

That means you've put down paper, picked up a pen, created a model based on a set of assumptions, applied that model coherently to reach the conclusion and then validated that the assumptions you made for your model did infact correspond to a good approximation of reality such as the result was validated in practice. You did all that? :o

In other words - our value judgements don't get somehow magically validated by virtue of attending school. Please don't do that.
 
That means you've put down paper, picked up a pen, created a model based on a set of assumptions, applied that model coherently to reach the conclusion and then validated that the assumptions you made for your model did infact correspond to a good approximation of reality such as the result was validated in practice. You did all that?
redface.png


In other words - our value judgements don't get somehow magically validated by virtue of attending school. Please don't do that.

Unfortunately, I haven't. I agree, but school broadens our sight, wouldn't you agree? I don't have to create a model or anything like that (although that would be rather favourable in this discussion). Why don't I have to make an extremely complicated model?

Because school got us covered for that. We talked and discussed various tax models, and they are needed. But real world conditions are something different. I believe my country is rated among one with the highest corruption levels. Why would I even want to create a model when it will be exploited by corrupt officials?
 
now here's something you don't see every day!

One Day After The Panama Papers Were Leaked, IRS Headquarters Closes Then Catches Fire

As we have been covering this week, the release of the Panama Papers has created a panic among world governments, by exposing some of their darkest secrets.

In the leak, 11.5 million documents were stolen from Mossack Fonseca and were leaked to Suddeutsche Zeitung, who then turned to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists to examine the documents.

In the time since, media organizations have been scrambling to sift through a large number of documents, in hopes of finding stories that they can spin to fit their narrative.

So far, most of the information to be released through the mainstream media has been directed at foreign governments and leaders, with a passing mention of several hundred American citizens who store their money offshore without reporting it to the IRS.

Ironically enough, at the height of the Panama Papers publicity, a fire broke out in the basement of the IRS headquarters, leading to a full closure of the headquarters for over a week.

{that should give 'em enough time to shred}

The timing of the fire and the closure have led many to speculate that perhaps the fire is an inside job, and created intentionally for the purpose of destroying records, which could possibly be evidence that correlates to Panama Papers revelations.

The building was closed and workers sent home approximately 45 minutes before flames engulfed the basement "due to electrical issues with the air-conditioning system," an IRS spokesman said.

He said that about 2,000 people work there but that "a few hundred" were still in the building when the fire broke out.

So far, there has been no indication from local authorities or representatives at the IRS as to whether the fire was an accident or an act of arson, and it is likely that this news will never be revealed.

However, it is important to point out that the IRS headquarters is one of the most secure buildings in the country, which would make it nearly impossible for someone to start a fire in the basement unless they had authorized access to the area.

More at... :D
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/04...rs-headquarters-closes-then-catches-fire.html
 
but school broadens our sight, wouldn't you agree?

Not necessarily. Kuhn has clerarly shown scientific progress is not a historically linear process. In other words, you do not know if what you are being taught is part of a "zig" or a "zag" of the process just by virtue of it being part of the curriculum.

Because school got us covered for that. We talked and discussed various tax models, and they are needed.

How is this argument apodectically stronger than that of a student in a different school that says: "we discussed various models of the earth and it is an inverted pyramid"? Before you try to answer, reread the Kuhn point above.

But real world conditions are something different. I believe my country is rated among one with the highest corruption levels. Why would I even want to create a model when it will be exploited by corrupt
officials?

This is interesting. Your deductions based on your immediate experience conclude to a different point of what you said school has taught you but you still consider it the truth written on Moses plaques. Notice the cognitive dissonance?
 
Not necessarily. Kuhn has clerarly shown scientific progress is not a historically linear process. In other words, you do not know if what you are being taught is part of a "zig" or a "zag" of the process just by virtue of it being part of the curriculum.



How is this argument apodectically stronger than that of a student in a different school that says: "we discussed various models of the earth and it is an inverted pyramid"? Before you try to answer, reread the Kuhn point above.



This is interesting. Your deductions based on your immediate experience conclude to a different point of what you said school has taught you but you still consider it the truth written on Moses plaques. Notice the cognitive dissonance?

Yes, it's noticeable, I agree. Still, we are all being taught different theoretical models on taxes (for example). Since this is theory we are talking about, it works perfectly, and everybody is happy. For example, I am sure you are familiar with Pigovian tax. In theory, it should work perfectly and correct all negative externalities. But in the real world, it doesn't work.

Same goes for every possible tax or any other problem. In theory, it works perfectly, in practice, there are always some elements that can't be controlled. The whole "cognitive dissonance" is between the theory and practice.
 
Back
Top