Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And that is why expats are giving up citizenship.
And I can't say as I blame them.
They live and work and pay taxes abroad and our greedy fingers just have to reach out for "our fair share".
And the paperwork/legal mess it could create is just not worth it to many individuals, banks and businesses abroad.
Not that the IRS will get "its day in court" because they won't. It is just a paperwork nightmare that many don't want to deal with.
No, it isn't. I posted actual VERIFIABLE historic FACTS.
Read it again to verify it for yourself. Links included for your convenience:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
The passage to which you've referred with that statement has already been proven to be historically inaccurate and therefore, NOT true. Proven to be false here: http://www.city-data.com/forum/31076944-post258.html
They confiscate the funds from U.S.-based financial transactions.
Yes, foreign financial institutions may be able to avoid FATCA costs and penalties if they never conduct business with a U.S. entity or financial institution. What are the odds of that?
The IRS can't get you or your money until you land back in the US or open a US bank account.
They cannot take it from the bank if the bank does international transactions.
They can only get the banks to report to them.
Arus is the one trying to pass off only "domicile" as "permanent domicile." Ask Arus to define "permanent domicile" in legal terms, citing the source, as he seems to be quite confused.
I know. I'm confused too. You seem to be the only one not confused. Why won't you alleviate our confusion by posting a link to your source of what "permanent domicile" means legally? Please, InformedConsent, tell us how you know what "permanent domicile" means legally.
Yes, we can require that American citizens pay taxes. And that includes Americans abroad. But if they don't pay, we can't go to Bolivia and arrest them. We can't throw them in Bolivian jails. We can tell the world they've broken an American law. But any prosecution, has to be done on AMERICAN soil. Hence, not worldwide jurisdiction. 'Cause if you had worldwide jurisdiction, you could arrest them anywhere, and you wouldn't even have to bring them back to the United States, you could put them on trial right there in Bolivia or France or South Africa, and put them in jail, there, too. But, but, but, we can't do that. Which means we don't really have jurisdiction. Because jurisdiction isn't just about passing laws, it's about enforcing the laws. It's about being able to arrest somebody, and detaining somebody, and about trying someone in a court of law. Ain't no American courtrooms in Saudi Arabia, heh, InformedConsent?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
