10 replies to this topic

[Rick]

Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook whose falling out with the company and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg was the subject of the 2010 blockbuster The Social Network, renounced his US citizenship last week, and the right has wasted no time labeling him a hero.
Saverin, who owns a roughly four percent stake of Facebook, announced that he was expatriating last week, just in time to avoid paying a federal capital gains tax on the fortune heading his way when the social site files its IPO.
Forbes Magazine, the conservative-leaning and business friendly magazine, ran an article with the headline
“For De-Friending The U.S., Facebook’s Eduardo Saverin Is An American Hero.”
John Tamny writes:
Saverin’s departure is also a reminder to politicians that while they can obnoxiously decree what percentage of our income we’ll hand them in taxes, what they vote for won’t necessarily reflect reality. Indeed, as evidenced by Saverin’s renunciation, tax rates and collection of monies on those rates are two different things. Assuming nosebleed rates of taxation were a driver of Saverin’s decision, politicians will hopefully see that if too greedy about collecting the money of others, they’ll eventually collect nothing.


http://thinkprogress...ship/?mobile=nc

[Moonlight Graham]

How can you be an American hero if you're not American? This writer also doesn't represent the entire "right-wing", he's just one guy.

[Topaz]

I read another article on this and he was born in Brazil and because of the taxes he decided to move to Sinapore but he did it too late because his investment were still in the US, so he will get hit by Uncle Sam. Besides, aren't many corporation leaving NA and going else where because of taxes and other costs, so what's the big deal with this guy. I've also read that the US taxes are now going to help China's military, because the other Treasury Bonds China holds.

[American Woman]

I think the exit tax should be heftier than any capital gains taxes that would have to be paid. There are reasons why Saverin's father took his family to the U.S. rather than to Singapore, and he enjoyed the fruits of those reasons - I don't see why he should be able to get off with paying less taxes than his (ex)partners will.

I found this article, which sums up my views, and says it well, IMO:

The U.S. — its schools, technology, capital markets and courts — made him rich. As Farhad Manjoo notes, the U.S. gave Saverin not just his money but also his life: when Saverin was 13, his wealthy family emigrated from Brazil to the U.S. in response to kidnapping threats.

Some are quick to criticize how tax dollars get spent when they go to so-called welfare queens. But what about welfare kings like Saverin and the corporate “persons” who behave like him? They have been subsidized at every turn: indirectly by the rule of law and the existence of world-class universities and infrastructure; directly by the loopholes and special treatment they write into law.

It’s true that renouncers have to pay an “exit tax” on their wealth when they quit America. But a truly just exit tax would cover the lifetime accrual of benefits — call them social investments, subsidies or welfare — that enabled those persons to accumulate wealth in the first place.

Read more: http://ideas.time.co.../#ixzz1uy1bIemu

[The_Squid]

Would Saverin have been a zillionaire if it wasn't for the USA, its people and its government?

Probably not.... sounds like a dirtbag to me, not a hero. But I think the greedy right-wing has different criteria for that than I do....

[fellowtraveller]

Saverin was not 'the subject' of The Social Network, he was a satellite in the orbit of Zuckerberg.
Lots of p[eople move themselves and their money offshore, there is nothing illegal about it.

[The_Squid]

Saverin was not 'the subject' of The Social Network, he was a satellite in the orbit of Zuckerberg.
Lots of p[eople move themselves and their money offshore, there is nothing illegal about it.

Nope, nothing illegal. Immoral certainly.

Getting rich in America and taking your money to live in a 3rd world country so you don't have to pay taxes (i.e. the betterment of society) is immoral.

[GostHacked]

Nope, nothing illegal. Immoral certainly.

Getting rich in America and taking your money to live in a 3rd world country so you don't have to pay taxes (i.e. the betterment of society) is immoral.

Tell that to any shipping industry conglomerate and what flag they wave. Tell that to north american corporations who have outsourced operations overseas just to avoid taxes and high wages.

[punked]

Nope, nothing illegal. Immoral certainly.

Getting rich in America and taking your money to live in a 3rd world country so you don't have to pay taxes (i.e. the betterment of society) is immoral.

It appears the Democrats are trying to fix this problem but the Republicans refuse to do anything because they love rich to much.

[American Woman]

Lots of p[eople move themselves and their money offshore, there is nothing illegal about it.

No one said it was illegal. Furthermore, "people moving themselves and their money offshore" is not the same as renouncing citizenship; it's not as if he has to renounce his citizenship to live in Singapore.

I have no problem with his renouncing his American citizenship - with a hefty exit tax.

[The_Squid]

Tell that to any shipping industry conglomerate and what flag they wave. Tell that to north american corporations who have outsourced operations overseas just to avoid taxes and high wages.

We should be telling them exactly that!