Obama to Close US Tax Loophole

and lets not forget about his pledge to raise the capital gains taxes for people who have money and risk investing it. thats very fair. that will get the housing market back on track. punish people for investing in houses!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

Not too bad so far.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...in-401k-plans/

i love this idea.

but then again.. maybe who lost their 401k's in the recent financial crisis or with past debacles like Enron et al... might disagree with someone trying to steer them to invest in 401k's... but that's just me.

thanks Obama for trying to save me from myself. i'll be busy drinking and smoking myself to death while snorting bacon strips if you need me to sign anything.

*yawn*

Why can't you at least make an intellectually honest argument?

First off, why is it unfair to raise capital gains tax after it was cut so many times? Why should a hedge fund manager making tens or hundreds of millions pay a 15% tax rate while his secretary pays a 27% rate?

As for the housing market, there's a generous exemption for primary residences that can be used once every two years, so the tax rate is hardly going to effect the housing market, which has already cratered.

This thread is about closing loopholes, but since you can't defend tax loopholes you've decided to have the 2008 campaign all over again and attack his entire agenda.
Can't you just admit that closing loopholes is a good thing even if you disagree with most everything else he's doing?

Yeah because money that goes in 401(k) accounts HAS to be invested in the stock market. That's the law. You're not allowed to use a tax privileged account to invest in treasuries or gold or CD's. :rollseyes

You know me and my income. I am making some pretty nice short term capital gains right now. Why should I have to pay a higher tax rate for depriving myself of the finer things in life to try and make more money? Everyone making capital gains is not a hedge fun manager!

Why can't you guys be honest about this stuff? A tax loophole is a government created law applied to the tax code. They were devised to steer investment to certain areas. Why can't you be honest and say that in our opinion investment in this particular area is no longer needed so we are going to eliminate the tax advantages associated with it.

Or is the true fact of the matter that you guys just want to increase taxes as much as you can without causing a revolt?

Are you sure?? I don't have a 401K. But i think most 401Ks allow you to invest in MUTUAL FUNDS. And I'd bet that mutual funds that invest in treasuries or gold are available.

I agree with 12 clicks 100%...

He was being sarcastic

What you are talking about has nothing to do with the thread subject... we are discussing closing tax haven loopholes... not increases in capital gains.

you don't seem to even know what a 401k is.

but thanks for playing!

;)

lets close the home mortgage interest loop hole!



oh, right. We can't shoot at that big a target, otherwise the rabble might actually wake up to what idiot spending by the government actually costs.

What exactly are you talking about? What does mortgage interest have to do with tax haven loopholes?

neither of your examples have anything to do with capital gains taxes. again, you don't seem to understand what capital gains taxes are.

there shouldn't be a capital gains tax to begin with. however, to use your example, when the secretary is the one out there buying up 100's of millions of dollars in real estate and making the economy turn, thrive and grow and creating 1000s of jobs, i will happily argue that she shouldn't be taxed at 27%.

why should i invest money in the US if i'm going to be punished for doing it well?

poor people and right brain people will never get these points. people take risks because there is incentive to do so... personal interests (or what guys like Nation-x will happily call "greed" so he can feel better about his own mediocrity). when you erode those incentives, investments decrease, peoples willingness to take risk decreases and the wheels of the economy slow down.

this is the fatal flaw of idea of higher taxes. all that is ever talked about is how it will increase revenue. no one will ever stop and address the negative impacts. and there are negative impacts.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For example, i don't know how old you are but Clinton pulled a lot of the same crap to make america fair and to pander to his constituents. I'm 38 and i remember this quite well. he created luxury taxes on expensive cars, boats, planes, jewelry, second properties etc.

the net result?

yacht sales plummeted.
luxury car sales plummeted
airplane sales plummeted
condo sales plummeted
jewelry sales plummeted

factories closed
people were laid off
jobs were lost
tax revenues in these areas declined

what happened? no one talked about it at all. these taxes were quietly rescinded.

This is the point about raising taxes.

You guys are trying to make an argument about "paying ones fair share", about "greedy corporations not caring" and about "republicans whoring themselves to business"

ALL OF THAT ignores the simple fact that tax increases come with not only negative consequences BUT also unintended consequences. there is no positive benefit to the economy and economy growth to raising taxes of any kind... there is only the idea that it will raise revenue to the federal government - which is a notion which wrongly assumes there will be no negative impact on investment, on business growth, on the attraction of foreign capital and capital flight out of the country.

Should there be taxes? sure. no one is dumb enough to argue that there shouldn't be taxes. Its a question of degrees. Someone here is trying to make the argument (maybe it was you) about Republicans constantly wanting to lower taxes. of course! No one is arguing for ZERO taxes. This is simply a basic conservative and libertarian value rooted in the belief that the total net benefit to lowering tax burdens are accelerated economic growth and increased revenue to the federal budget. It has nothing to do with greed. Just as with the Luxury Tax from Clinton... when you punish success with increased taxes, you hurt the economy.

It is certainly counter intuitive to think that a rich guy or corporation paying less taxes is going to do more for the economy than a poor person paying less taxes, but that's one of many simple fact of macro economics.

I figured it was over the rabbles' head.

one loop hole is no different than any other. The rabble (you) applaud closing evil loop holes (any loop hole you can't take advantage of)
this happens because you're not bright enough to understand the consequences of further pushing multi national corps. out of the country.

pearls before swine

go Obama fuck them all

Brilliant post.



.

Maybe one of these days you can grasp simple concepts... like the fact that deducting mortgage interest is LEGAL while hiding income is ILLEGAL and what Obama is talking about is removing loopholes that allow companies/people to hide income ILLEGALLY. You call me rabble... but in reality, you are the one buying into the right wing propaganda about this subject... thx for playing tho.

the loopholes in question are legal you fucking moron. what do you think he is doing? making a law to make an illegal thing more illegal?

you are so fucking thick its unreal. you can't continually blame your ignorance and stupidity on "republican propaganda".

the loopholes in question are legal you fucking moron. what do you think he is doing? making a law to make an illegal thing more illegal?

you are so fucking thick its unreal. you can't continually blame your ignorance and stupidity on "republican propaganda".
-------------------------------------

repeated for eloquence.

Damn this thread turned into a republican circle jerk really fast.

You guys have fun patting each other on the back over how great you are and how stupid the 60%+ of the country who disagrees with you are.

You guys were crying this same river in 1993 and all your chicken little shit never came to pass. Meanwhile, you guys got your way through pretty much the entire last decade, and now we're all up the creek without a paddle.

Whether you think it's right or not is irrelevant, the country is willing to try it the other's guys way for awhile, and I guess you just have to hope he fails miserably.

I find it hilarious that an idiot like you constantly refers to people who disagree with them as rabble.

There is no mortgage interest loophole, there is, however, a mortgage interest deduction.

You, my idiotic republican friend, need a refresher on your vocabulary. Just because Hannity and Limbaugh are comparing these loopholes to the mortgage deduction doesn't mean it's true.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/loophole
Perhaps next time, before you come calling all of us idiots and trolls, you could make sure you're clear on the definitions of the words you're throwing around. It'll save you some embarrassment.

Unfortunately, I know you won't, and if you like I can write your next post for you.

Here goes.

Maybe you should learn how to read... read what I posted again so that you might gain understanding, grasshopper. Hiding taxable income from the government IS a crime. I think you are failing to understand what the whole thing is about... We are not discussing LEGAL loopholes... we are talking about ILLEGAL USE of loopholes to evade taxes.

ignorance and mediocrity are bliss.

sorry, shitstain. the title of this thread is "Obama to Close US Tax Loophole"

not, "Obama to stamp out crime"

oh damn, see I thought "idiot" and "looking up your nose at your betters" would have covered my ignorance and mediocrity.

Sorry for not covering that and making you post again.

poor, deluded child.
obama is proposing changes to the tax code.
I'm sure its over your head but......

"""Under the plan, companies would not be able to write off domestic expenses for generating profits abroad. """""

now try this:

"""Under the plan, homeowners would not be able to write off mortgage expenses generated from purchasing a home. """""


its utterly amazing that you post without the self awareness that would tell you you're embarrassing yourself.

I can find ways to laugh at trash in multiple ways.

The topic is about Obamas plan...

Read _>> http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_...JOBS-OVERSEAS/

Replacing Tax Advantages for Creating Jobs Overseas With Incentives to Create Them at Home

• Reforming Deferral Rules to Curb A Tax Advantage for Investing and Reinvesting Overseas
• Closing Foreign Tax Credit Loopholes
• Using Savings To Make Permanent The Tax Credit for Investing in Research and Experimentation at Home

Getting Tough on Overseas Tax Havens

• Eliminating Loopholes for "Disappearing" Offshore Subsidiaries
• Cracking Down on the Abuse of Tax Havens by Individuals
• Devoting New Resources for IRS Enforcement to Help Close the International Tax Gap

Why is this action necessary? http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96ec9414-3...44feabdc0.html

Obama (since you jackasses don't even seem to understand what you're arguing) is proposing to close this loophole so that a legal practics becomes illegal.

That is what this thread and the thread title is about. This is what the "loophole" is.


its totally unreal how absurdly thick you guys are.

You can't rebut the Clinton points because its undeniable fact and the perfect example of both the negative and unintended consequences of increasing taxes.

Yup, I Agree with both guy.

How do you know? I don't think you even read the proposal because that is only a part of it... so who is thick now? circle jerk some more so I can continue to call you an idiot... ok?

Using a loophole is legal. The end result of what the loophole was used for, is illegal.

He isn't making a new law, he is reforming the old tax code so the current law/tax code that already governs this can be properly used.

You don't need this check box to run a legit setup, MS, Google, Dell, etc all do it legally. So not sure how this is going to bring our Country down when 100% of the top Companies do it, legit..

These companies didn't "designate overseas subsidiaries as branches of the company" and then get that company earning money, and then lie saying they reported/paid local tax (on staff located in America), and never reported back to the Gov <-- ie: the loophole.

Now, they will have to be a legit int corp or report taxes on money earned by U.S. Owned/Controlled/Ran "fake subsidiary" companies with no staff. <-- already illegal, so why have a loophole that DOES NOT make it legal for you to do this?


It's really simple to understand...

part of what you fucking moron? there is the article in question and the subject of the discussion. i don't need to read detailed proposals to understand "loophole", "closing tax loopholes" and to understand the specific loopholes which were mentioned in the article or about the price of midget tears in Taiwan... and I don't need to investigate to understand these things which have been a focal point of his campaign even in the nomination process and as someone who has moved millions of dollars around the world through networks of companies scattered around the globe.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/...ode/index.html
that's the link dipshit. that's the article being discussed. don't hurt yourself trying to be reasonable or rational or by attempting to track with some coherent thoughts

you haven't said a single fucking thing that's made sense and you're calling other people idiots? that pretty much sums of GFY and most of America right there!!

Hiding taxable income is ILLEGAL... do we need to say it 50 times? The "check-the-box" loophole still does not make it legal to not declare taxable income... and THAT is what the question is here... they are using that loophole (which is legal) to hide income (which is illegal). Understand now?

completely untrue. NO ONE not even obama is claiming otherwise.

wrong. "properly used" is your opinion only. they are changing the tax code to collect more revenue from companies who have assets/offices overseas. they will in effect be double taxing these corps (look it up)
"""The U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued a statement saying that changing the provisions would hurt job prospects.

"The United States is the only major industrialized country which double taxes the overseas earnings of our companies. Since other countries don't subject their companies to double taxation, U.S. companies need deferral to stay competitive in the global marketplace," said the chamber's chief economist Marty Regalia.

"When you limit deferral, you limit the ability of U.S. companies to compete, you impede growth in the U.S. economy, and you cause the loss of jobs -- both at the companies directly impacted and companies in their supply chains," he said.""""

please post a url to this fact 100% of the top Companies do it, legit
I'll wait right here.

nor did any other company using current tax law. again, you confuse abiding by current tax law with breaking the law.

this is proof that you're in over your head.
we're talking about closing a legal loop hole and so is obama. you're talking about something else entirely and trying to muddy the water to seem right.


It's really simple to understand...[/QUOTE]

hahahaha

Claiming all these companies are going to up and leave is a bunch of bullshit. I'm happy to see Obama can see through this.

The wealthy people always threaten this.. If taxes go up, we'll just leave... Riiiiight. Just sign this one paper, get on a plane, and yer gone right? You and your thousands of employees, buildings, infrastructure - fedex will take care of that - from their headquarters in Mumbai...

And to all the republicans who say the government spends too much... You just had 8 years, and you GREW the government too.

Nobody wants a smaller government but the people. And the people don't matter at all.

Nice one socks!

you are beyond help.

tax evasion= illegal
tax avoidance = legal

.... let me help you again with a direct quote from the article in question:

some companies are using overseas subsidiaries to shelter money. they aren't doing anything illegal. they are using legal business structures to minimize their tax burden. its not about people claiming they have a company that doesn't exist just because the check box exists on a tax form.

you have no understanding of what you are talking about or the issues and to be truthful, i almost admire this dogged determination you have to stay stupid. although its not a choice i would make, i have to respect the fact that you simply won't waiver from achieving that objective and from your goals.

i've moved more money around the world than you will ever see in your life. i fully understand the issues and have a very strong grasp of tax law as it pertains to international business structures from personal experience. this is like teaching advanced calculus to a cat, so i'm done wasting my time. you just continue trudging through your own life, telling yourself that anyone who doesn't share your own narrow and misguided view of the world is either stupid or brainwashed. i'll just go back to making money and making sure i give as little as possible to people like you.

i don't blame you man. i blame bad genes and a failed public school system, neither of which are your fault. i understand that you need obama. you need someone to stand up and say "hey, i'm going to take care of you because you just can't do it on your own". I don't need that so i guess we will never share the same world view.

Some countries make it easy for U.S. taxpayers to evade or avoid U.S. taxes by withholding information about U.S.-held accounts or giving favorable tax treatment to shell corporations created just to avoid taxes. In certain cases, companies are taking advantage of currently legal loopholes to avoid paying taxes by shifting their profits to tax havens. In other cases, Americans break the law by hiding their income in hidden overseas accounts, and these tax havens refuse to provide the information the IRS needs to enforce U.S. law. Either way, these tax havens make our tax system less fair and harm the U.S. economy. President Obama proposes to address tax havens by:

1. Eliminating Loopholes that Allow "Disappearing" Offshore Subsidiaries: Current law allows U.S. businesses to establish foreign subsidiary corporations, but then to "check a box" to pretend that the subsidiaries do not exist for U.S. tax purposes. This practice allows taxes that would otherwise be paid in the U.S. on passive income to be avoided, at great cost to U.S. taxpayers.

Current Law

• Disappearing Subsidiaries Allow Corporations to Shift Income Tax-Free: Traditionally, if a U.S. company sets up a foreign subsidiary in a tax haven and one in another country, income shifted between the two subsidiaries (for example, through interest on loans) would be considered "passive income" for the U.S. company and subject to U.S. tax. Over the last decade, so-called "check-the box" rules have allowed U.S. firms to make these subsidiaries disappear for U.S. tax purposes. With the separate subsidiaries disregarded, the firm can shift income among them without reporting any passive income or paying any U.S. tax. As a result, U.S. firms that invest overseas are able to shift their income to tax havens. It is clear that this loophole, while legal, has become a reason to shift billions of dollars in investments from the U.S. to other counties.

Example under Current Law

• Suppose that a U.S. company invests $10 million to build a new factory in Germany. At the same time, it sets up three new corporations. The first is a wholly owned Cayman Islands holding company. The second is a corporation in Germany, which is owned by the holding company and owns the factory. The third is a Cayman Islands subsidiary, also owned by the Cayman Islands holding company.
• The Cayman subsidiary makes a loan to the German subsidiary. The interest on the loan is income to the Cayman subsidiary and a deductible expense for the German subsidiary. In this way, income is shifted from higher-tax Germany to the no-tax Cayman Islands.
• Under traditional U.S. tax law, this income shift would count as passive income for the U.S. parent ? which would have to pay taxes on it. But "check the box" rules allow the firm to make the two subsidiaries disappear ? and the income shift with them. As a result, the firm is able to avoid both U.S. taxes and German taxes on its profits.

The Administration?s Proposal

• Require U.S. Businesses That Establish Certain Foreign Corporations To Treat Them As Corporations For U.S. Tax Purposes: The Administration?s proposal seeks to abolish a range of tax-avoidance techniques by requiring U.S. businesses that establish certain corporations overseas to report them as corporations on their U.S. tax returns. As a result, U.S. firms that invest overseas would no longer be able to make their subsidiaries ? or their income shifts to tax havens ? disappear for tax purposes. This would level the playing field between firms that invest overseas and those that invest at home.
• Raise $86.5 Billion from 2011 to 2019: This loophole would be closed beginning in 2011, raising $86.5 billion from 2011 to 2019.

2. Cracking Down on the Abuse of Tax Havens by Individuals: The IRS is already engaged in significant efforts to track down and collect taxes from individuals illegally hiding income overseas. But to fully follow through on this effort, it will need new legal authorities. Current law makes it difficult for the IRS to collect the information it needs to determine that the holder of a foreign bank account is a U.S. citizen evading taxation. The Obama administration proposes changes that will enhance information reporting, increase tax withholding, strengthen penalties, and shift the burden of proof to make it harder for foreign account-holders to evade U.S. taxes, while also providing the enforcement tools necessary to crack down on tax haven abuse.

Current Law

• A Free Ride for Financial Institutions that Flout Reporting Rules: A centerpiece of the current U.S. regime to combat international tax evasion is the Qualified Intermediary (QI) program, under which financial institutions sign an agreement to share information about their U.S. customers with the IRS. Unfortunately, this regime, while effective, has become subject to abuse:
• At Non-Qualifying Institutions, Withholding Requirements Are Easy to Escape: Currently, an investor can escape withholding requirements by simply attesting to being a non-U.S. person. That leaves it to the IRS to show that the investor is actually a U.S. citizen evading the law.
• Loopholes Allow Qualifying Institutions to Still Serve as Conduits for Evasion: Moreover, financial institutions can qualify as QIs even if they are affiliated with non-QIs. As a result, a financial institution need not give up its business as a conduit for tax evasion in order to enjoy the benefits of being a QI. In addition, QIs are not currently required to report the foreign income of their U.S. customers, so U.S. customers may hide behind foreign entities to evade taxes through QIs.
• Legal Presumptions Favor Tax Evaders Who Conceal Transactions: U.S. investors overseas are required to file the Foreign Bank and Financial Account Report, or FBAR, disclosing ownership of financial accounts in a foreign country containing over $10,000. The FBAR is particularly important in the case of investors who employ non-QIs, because their transactions are less likely to be disclosed otherwise. Unfortunately, current rules make it difficult to catch those who are supposed to file the FBAR but do not. And even when the IRS has evidence that a U.S. taxpayer has a foreign account, legal presumptions currently favor the tax evader — without specific evidence that the U.S person has an account that requires an FBAR, the IRS cannot compel an investor to provide the report or impose penalties for the failure to do so. This specific evidence may be almost impossible for the IRS to get.
• The IRS Lacks the Tools It Needs to Enforce International Tax Laws: In addition to the shortcomings of the QI program, current law features inadequate tools to crack down on wealthy taxpayers who evade taxation. Investors who withhold information about overseas investments face penalties limited to 20 percent of the amount of the understatement. The statute of limitations for enforcement is typically only three years – which is often too short a time period for the IRS to get the information it needs to determine whether a taxpayer with an offshore account paid the right amount of tax. And there are no requirements that U.S. individuals or third parties report transfers to and from foreign accounts, limiting the ability of the IRS to determine whether taxpayers are paying what they owe.

Example Under Current Law

• Through a U.S. broker, a U.S. account-holder at a non-qualified intermediary sells $50 million worth of securities.
• If the seller self-certifies that he is not a U.S. citizen and the non-qualified intermediary simply passes that information along to the U.S. broker, the broker may rely on that statement and does not need to withhold money from the transaction.
• As a result, a U.S. taxpayer who provides a false self-certification can easily avoid paying taxes, since the non-QI has not signed an agreement with the IRS, and the IRS may have limited tools to detect any wrongdoing.

Administration Proposal

In addition to initiatives taken within the G-20 to impose sanctions on countries judged by their peers not to be adequately implementing information exchange standards, the Obama administration proposes to make it more difficult to shelter foreign investments from taxation by cracking down on financial institutions that enable and profit from international tax evasion. These measures – expected to raise $8.7 billion over 10 years – would:

• Strengthen the "Qualified Intermediary" System to Crack Down on Tax Evaders: The core of the Obama Administration’s proposals is a tough new stance on investors who use financial institutions that do not agree to be Qualifying Intermediaries. Under this proposal, the assumption will be that these institutions are facilitating tax evasion, and the burden of proof will be shifted to the institutions and their account-holders to prove they are not sheltering income from U.S. taxation. As a result, the Administration proposes to:
• Impose Significant Tax Withholding On Transactions Involving Non-Qualifying Intermediaries: The Administration’s plan would require U.S. financial institutions to withhold 20 percent to 30 percent of U.S. payments to individuals who use non-QIs. To get a refund for the amount withheld, investors must disclose their identities and demonstrate that they’re obeying the law.
• Create A Legal Presumption Against Users Of Non-Qualifying Intermediaries: The Administration’s plan would create rebuttable evidentiary presumptions that any foreign bank, brokerage, or other financial account held by a U.S. citizen at a non-QI contains enough funds to require that an FBAR be filed, and that any failure to file an FBAR is willful if an account at a non-QI has a balance of greater than $200,000 at any point during the calendar year. These presumptions will make it easier for the IRS to demand information and pursue cases against international tax evaders. This shifting of legal presumptions is a key component of the anti-tax haven legislation long championed by Senator Carl Levin.
• Limit QI Affiliations With Non-QIs: The Administration’s plan would give the Treasury Department authority to issue regulations requiring that a financial institution may be a QI only if all commonly-controlled financial institutions are also QIs. As a result, financial firms couldn’t benefit from siphoning business from their legitimate QI operations to illegitimate non-QI affiliates.
• Provide the IRS With The Legal Tools Necessary to Prosecute International Tax Evasion: The Obama administration proposes to improve the ability of the IRS to successfully prosecute international tax evasion through the following steps:
• Increase Penalties for Failing to Report Overseas Investments: The Administration’s plan would double certain penalties when a taxpayer fails to make a required disclosure of foreign financial accounts.
• Extend the Statute of Limitations for International Tax Enforcement: The Administration’s plan would set the statute of limitations on international tax enforcement at six years after the taxpayer submits required information.
• Tighten Lax Reporting Requirements: The Administration’s plan would increase the reporting requirement on international investors and financial institutions, especially QIs. QIs would be required to report information on their U.S. customers to the same extent that U.S. financial intermediaries must. And U.S. customers at QIs would no longer be allowed to hide behind foreign entities. U.S. investors would be required to report transfers of money or property made to or from non-QI foreign financial institutions on their income tax returns. Financial institutions would face enhanced information reporting requirements for transactions that establish a foreign business entity or transfer assets to and from foreign financial accounts on behalf of U.S. individuals.

here's a clue for the employees of the world.
multi national corps can and do change home countries to save on taxes.
on top of that, what employees don't understand until its too late is that business owners don't have to leave the country but you don't have them by the balls.
if wealthy people lose money and want to make up for it, they fire employees.
the end.

keep on trying to cook the goose that lays the golden eggs.

So... in your mind... anyone that runs an affiliate site is an employee?

I stated "Using a loophole is legal. The end result of what the loophole was used for, is illegal."

This is true, quoted "But over the past decade, so-called "check-the-box" rules have allowed companies to make their foreign subsidiaries "disappear" for tax purposes – permitting them to legally shift income to tax havens and make the taxes they owe the United States disappear as well."

The loophole allows them to shift the income.. SHIFT, not earn it's own. Because they don't have to report the money back, because the "claimed" it was a legal subsidiary when it wasn't. IE: quoted again "make the taxes they owe the United States disappear"

They didn't say, might owe, they said "they owe" - Because they "shifted" the money, it's not a legal international running corporation.

That's Illegal... Thus - My statement is true, without question. "Using a loophole is legal. The end result of what the loophole was used for, is illegal."

Your quote and what I said aren't related at all. It is a fact that they are reforming a law, that was put into place.. which started to be abused about 10 years ago.

Now, with what you said... Companies can still do this legally, and it's not double tax. This loophole, doesn't 'stop' a double tax from happening.. Companies DO this LEGALLY without checking box, and aren't subject to double tax.


Actually, they said something like 65% of the top 100 companies use subsidiary companies - which is of course a duh. But these companies are running them, as unique offshore Corps, funding themselves.. legal business. It doesn't talk about abuse from them at all.

The abuse is happening with the money and assets being "shifted" to a Corporations so the 'owner and other corps' can take the money without paying tax.

That's a quote.. "shifted"

You know this is happening in our Industry... we have both had the talk.


Why try to twist what I said, let me quote it again.. "Using a loophole is legal. The end result of what the loophole was used for, is illegal."

So clearly, Obama would be reforming a legal loophole. No twisting needed..

But when you "shift" money and assets, from that day forward you still owe tax on the money - thus the end result is using the loophole, does not make it 'legal' for you to 'shift' money and avoid paying tax you do owe.

Do you understand what is legal about the loophole? It allows what should be an actually is a U.S. Corp, to be setup and ran like a foreign corp and pay taxes like them, when they actually aren't.. That's the thing.. the aren't int corps... it's fake, a lie.. and the companies are 'shifting' money and assets to them, which is illegal.

Quoted "require certain foreign subsidiaries to be considered as separate corporations for U.S. tax purposes"

See the word "certain" - If your setup and doing it legally, as a real foreign corp doing business and/or reporting your money back correctly, you have nothing to worry about.

Ayn Rand called, she wants her bullshit back.

TheDoc, restating your opinion doesn't turn them into facts.