wow! this thread actually got huge! :thumbsup

isn't it kinda too high for most of the webmasters here?

well he said merchant account for paysites, not a personal bank account for affiliates evading taxes :winkwink:

If you're a UK citizen, you can complete the P85 form and leave the UK and hence become a non-resident. You won't pay any taxes on income you make from then onwards as long as the income didn't come from the UK. You may come back to the UK but not stay more than 91 days in a tax year.

You can go live in, for example, Prague and rent and apartment there. You can stay in Czech Republic as long as you like if you a UK passport holder and rent an apartment long term. However they want you to have international health insurance and not ask for welfare/income support payments. With an ADSL broadband connection, you can run your business.

You can pay yourself huge dividends from the Cyprus LTD after a few years and go back to living in the UK without any of it being taxed. As long as you that massive dividend you paid yourself was while you were non-resident. Check out taxcafe .co .uk for books and then ask your accountant :)

Quality of apartments: www happyhouserentals.com/output.php?lim=0&ht=2&hs=2&adv=1&dtd=1

Hehe :winkwink::thumbsup

Interesting thread, how could I have missed this one :)

interesting thread, it worth a bump now

true :2 cents:

I tried Panama, Im a US citizen, there are many luxuries you give up when you leave the US or other 1st world countries...tax is usually high in certain places for decent reasons

Deprived of "luxuries"?? What would they be? :winkwink:

Tax is also non-existant in some places because they earn more from offshore services than they would ever earn from taxes - or, in the case of Panama, more than they would earn from the Panama Canal :)

if you are an American, you can not hide from your government. ;)

unless you fall off the grid completely and carry cash only.

Many countries have many Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) with other countries. This doesn't necessarily mean its bad. For instance, treaties exist that define standards for extradition or for the prosecution of serious crimes committed by citizens of the foreign country in question. The only MLAT currently in force between the US and Panama is this sort of treaty (see library.findlaw.com/1997/Dec/1/127851.html).

Panama has NO MLATs with the US having to do with the sharing of Tax information or Banking information and does not recognize court rulings from other countries involving crimes which are not also crimes recognized by Panama. Failure to pay taxes is not a crime in Panama. There is also no requirement to file which carries a criminal penalty for failure.

Yup, you'll get hit with tax evasion and be even more fucked than just having to pay some back taxes

You are actually mostly correct.

Ownership is the path to liability. He who owns, pays.

There is no reason at all to renounce your U.S. citizenship, however. You don't even have to move.

However, there is no reason one must own the asset in order to control and benefit from it.

In Panama, for instance, it's possible to conceal the true owner of an entity while at the same time remaining in complete control. And it can be structured in a way that, even if the owner is discovered, it isn't you, so no liability can be attached.

What I'm trying to say is, if you relinquish ownership, but retain control, you're in a position to benefit totally but have no liability.

Well, that depends on one's definition of "going offshore", of course.

If I own a business and I simply redomicile that business in another jurisdiction and continue with business as usual, I will likely not have avoided much tax liability.

However, If I effectively shut down my business in my home jurisdiction, then direct that a similar business, which I do NOT own, open up in another jurisdiction (according to the laws of that jurisdiction) that I elect to control and manage, I might find that my tax liability is greatly reduced or even eliminated altogether due to the sharp reduction in personal "income". Also, depending on which jurisdiction I selected, the corporate tax liability may be much lower or non-existent as well.

I'd like the capability to travel abroad, but California is a killer place to live.

My reasons for wanting to go offshore are to avoid the celebrity attorneys that just want to make some quick money by scaring you with C&D. My feeling is that if they see you are offshore they will be much less likely to pursue anything since it would require actually filing papers in that actual country. I may be mistaken about this but I have always been told if they can't find you they can't sue you. In regards to tax reduction why can't I have offshore merchant accounts, bank accounts and simply make trips over to the country with a few friends each bringing back $!0k in cash (which last I checked was the amount you didn't have to declare with customs) In addition I could purchase precious metals and other things of value. Since there should be no record of this wouldn't this amount of money be "taxfree'"? After which I would then file US corp taxes for a much lesser amount as to not wonder how I am supporting my "lifestyle" It's obvious they will follow bank transactions and such but since I physically got the money there would be no record of me bringing it over. Am I way off here or is somewhat of a "solution"

This is not true if you live abroad and claim foreign income. If you are working abroad, it doesn't matter where the income comes from or where it is paid to. It still falls under foreign income, thus if you are able to qualify for the 80k (82k I think it is now) break, you claim a modest salary, could be... 70k, and you sir don't pay taxes to the USA so long as you set up your business in a tax free country. Or even if you claim 100k salary, after the 80k exemption that leaves 20k, plus some deductions and what not, you will end up paying around $4000 in taxes if done right, while the company makes the bank in a tax free country.

Offshore merchant accounts feeding offshore bank accounts held by offshore corporations: all good things in and of themselves.

I have a number of clients/associates who elect to repatriate assets by physically bringing cash or precious metals back to the states following a trip to their offshore jurisdiction. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but its definitely not necessary. There are many ways to repatriate funds without raising suspicion, incurring a tax liability or violating the law. One such way is a loan. Lent funds are not taxable income. One can apply for and receive a loan from an offshore company on private terms of repayment. If you're not proficient ant documenting such transactions, it is easy to hire an attorney or CPA to draft the appropriate Note for execution by representatives for the offshore entity and yourself.

Also, proper structuring should result in a seriously decreased need for personal funds. Expenses such as travel, living, utilities and entertainment can and should be paid for by Corporate entities and in the name of corporate entities.

i wanna hear more....bump!