Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Global Elite Are Hiding 18 Trillion Dollars In Offshore Banks
The Economic Collapse ^ | 01/21/2012 | Michael Snyder

Posted on 01/22/2012 6:49:15 AM PST by SeekAndFind

In recent days, the fact that Mitt Romney has millions of dollars parked down in the Cayman Islands has made headlines all over the world. But when it comes to offshore banking, what Mitt Romney is doing is small potatoes. The truth is that the global elite are hiding an almost unbelievable amount of money in offshore banks. According to shocking research done by the IMF, the global elite are holding a total of 18 trillion dollars in offshore banks. And that figure does not even count any money being held in Switzerland. That is a staggering amount of money. Keep in mind that U.S. GDP in 2010 was only 14.58 trillion dollars. So why do the global elite go to such trouble to hide their money in offshore banks? Well, there are two main reasons. One is privacy and the other is low taxation. Privacy is a big issue for those that are involved in illegal enterprises such as drug running, but the biggest reason why people move money into offshore banks is in order to avoid taxes. Some set up bank accounts in foreign nations because they want to legally minimize their taxes and others set up bank accounts in foreign nations because they want to illegally avoid taxes. You would be absolutely amazed at what some large corporations and wealthy individuals do to get out of paying taxes. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the rest of us don't have the resources or the knowledge to play these games, so we get taxed into oblivion.

So why do they call it "offshore banking"?

Well, the term originally developed because the banks on the Channel Islands were "offshore" from the United Kingdom. Most "offshore banks" are still located on islands today. The Cayman Islands, Bermuda, the Bahamas, and the Isle of Man are examples of this. Other "offshore banking centers" such as Monaco are actually not "offshore" at all, but the term applies to them anyway.

Traditionally, these offshore banking centers have been very attractive to both criminals and to the global elite because they would not tell anyone (including governments) about the money that anyone had parked there.

These days some governments (particularly the U.S. government) are trying to change this, but we certainly will not see the end of offshore banking any time soon.

The amount of money that goes through these offshore banks is absolutely astounding.

It has been estimated that 80 percent of all international banking transactions take place through these offshore banks. $1.4 trillion is being held in offshore banks in the Cayman Islands alone.

One article in the Guardian estimated that a third of all the wealth on the entire globe is being held in offshore banks, and others believe that as much as half of all the capital in the world flows through offshore banks at some point.

Obviously, all of this tax avoidance means that governments around the world are missing out on a whole lot of money.

It has been estimated that the U.S. government is missing out on $100 billion a year because of these offshore banks. Others would put that figure significantly higher.

Avoiding taxes is a game that the global elite have mastered. They are playing a whole different ballgame than you and I are. They don't just sit there like idiots and get blasted with taxes. Instead, they hire the best experts and they employ every trick in the book to hold on to as much money as they possibly can.

These days, taking advantage of offshore tax havens is not that complicated to do. The following is from a recent Politico article....

A plausible scenario plays out like this: I hire an accountant. Doing her job, my accountant tells me that if I sign a few legal documents and route my money through a small Caribbean island, I could keep more of my paycheck and pay a lower tax rate. I may have earned my money in the United States, but legally I can claim that it was, in fact, earned in a tax haven.

If it is legal, perhaps more of us should look into this.

After all, if playing these kinds of games is good enough for Mitt Romney, then why isn't it good enough for all the rest of us?

During a campaign stop recently, Romney said the following....

"I can tell you we follow the tax laws"

I certainly believe him when he says that. But it is what he said next that is troubling....

"And if there's an opportunity to save taxes, we like anybody else in this country will follow that opportunity."

I certainly believe him when he says that too.

ABC News recently revealed that Bain Capital has established an astounding 138 different offshore funds in the Cayman Islands.

Something has got to work pretty well to want to do it 138 times.

But Bain Capital was also very busy over in other offshore banking centers as well.

One of the largest shell companies that Bain set up down in the Caribbean was called Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd. It did not have an office in Bermuda and it had no staff in Bermuda. But it helped clients of Bain Capital avoid a whole lot of taxes.

The following comes from a 2007 Los Angeles Times article....

In Bermuda, Romney served as president and sole shareholder for four years of Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd. It funneled money into Bain Capital's Sankaty family of hedge funds, which invest in bonds and other debt issued by corporations, as well as bank loans.

Like thousands of similar financial entities, Sankaty maintains no office or staff in Bermuda. Its only presence consists of a nameplate at a lawyer's office in downtown Hamilton, capital of the British island territory.

"It's just a mail drop, essentially," said Marc B. Wolpow, who worked with Romney for nine years at Bain Capital and who set up Sankaty Ltd. in October 1997 without ever visiting Bermuda. "There's no one doing any work down there other than lawyers."

The amount of money being funneled through Sankaty today is absolutely stunning....

Today, Bain Capital manages $60 billion in assets, according to a spokesman. The total includes $23 billion in Sankaty debt and credit funds. Half a dozen Sankaty affiliates now are active in Bermuda, corporate registry records show.

The Sankaty debt hedge funds are organized as partnerships in Delaware that produce taxable business income by investing in fixed-income bonds and other debt instruments. Under tax law, even tax-exempt U.S. institutions may face a 35% tax if they invest directly in such hedge funds. By investing instead through a Bermuda corporation, the taxes are legally blocked, experts say.

Of course all of this is perfectly legal.

So nobody gets into trouble for any of this.

By keeping money offshore, even those managing these kinds of funds can avoid being taxed.

Victor Fleischer, a tax professor at the University of Colorado Law School, recently explained how this works....

"The idea behind some of the Cayman Island strategies was that the income that the fund managers receive for managing the money would be kept offshore in the Cayman Island — and the chief benefit is that you can defer when you recognize that income until a later date and you can reinvest the money from the Cayman islands and none of those reinvested funds get taxed until you bring them back either"

So was Romney doing this?

We may never know unless he shows us his tax returns.

What we do know is that Romney has millions of dollars of his own personal wealth invested in offshore tax havens.

The following comes from ABC News....

In addition to paying the lower tax rate on his investment income, Romney has as much as $8 million invested in at least 12 funds listed on a Cayman Islands registry. Another investment, which Romney reports as being worth between $5 million and $25 million, shows up on securities records as having been domiciled in the Caymans.

But Romney does not just have money invested down in the Cayman Islands. Apparently his money is invested in a whole host of offshore tax havens.

The following quote comes from a Reuters article....

Bain funds in which Romney is invested are scattered from Delaware to the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, Ireland and Hong Kong, according to a Reuters analysis of securities filings.

So is there anything wrong with this?

Well, it depends on how you define "wrong".

What Romney is doing is perfectly legal.

But it also stinks. Washington lawyer Jack Blum recently told ABC News the following about Romney's finances....

"His personal finances are a poster child of what's wrong with the American tax system"

So now we may have a few hints as to why Romney may not want to release his old tax returns.

But as noted above, what Romney is doing is just small potatoes compared to what the ultra-wealthy do.

The U.S. Congress has been trying to clamp down on offshore banking, but the ultra-wealthy are always two or three steps ahead of them.

The ultra-wealthy will go to just about any extreme in order to avoid paying taxes.

In fact, the Washington Post has reported that an increasing number of wealthy individuals are actually deciding to renounce their citizenship rather than face the wrath of the IRS.

The ultra-wealthy aren't really concerned that much with national citizenship anyway. If they want to influence an election, they can have far more influence by donating a few million bucks to a "Super PAC" than they can by casting the few votes that they have.

In a previous article, I described how the ultra-wealthy use offshore banks as a "shadow banking system" that plays by rules that most people don't even know exist....

It is a shadow banking system that most Americans don't know anything about. Most Americans don't have the resources to be able to set up shell companies in half a dozen different countries so that they can "filter" their profits. Most Americans don't know a thing about complicated tax avoidance plans that tax lawyers use such as the "Double Irish" and the "Dutch Sandwich". Most Americans would have no idea how to eventually have most of the money that they make end up in Bermuda so that it can avoid taxes.

Most among the global elite simply do not care that U.S. debt is climbing into the stratosphere. All they care about is keeping as much of their own money in their pockets as they possibly can.

Of course there are always exceptions to this rule. Warren Buffett recently wrote a check to the U.S. Treasury for a little more than $49,000 to help pay off the national debt.

But considering the fact that the U.S. national debt is increasing by more than 100 million dollars an hour, that didn't exactly do much to help.

Our system is deeply broken and the global elite are getting away with bloody murder. Over the decades, they have carefully crafted the rules so that as much wealth as possible is funneled into their pockets, and they have carefully crafted the rules so that as much wealth as possible stays in their pockets.

Of course if we got rid of the personal income tax and the corporate income tax entirely and replaced them with a completely new system we could get rid of all of this game playing once and for all.

But what do you think the odds are of that happening?



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Society
KEYWORDS: banks; corporatetax; corptaxavoidance; offshorebanks; wealth

1 posted on 01/22/2012 6:49:24 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And you and I would do the same damned thing if we had that kind of money.


2 posted on 01/22/2012 6:51:30 AM PST by Grunthor (I don't vote for Democrats, this includes Mitt Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
And this is the One World Government elite that has this money. They are doing this on purpose. Bankrupt all governments so they get total control. Come riding to the rescue with the Antichrist out front.
3 posted on 01/22/2012 6:53:23 AM PST by RetiredArmy (The End of Days draws near. In this time, you should be drawing closer to the Lord Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I oppose a VAT tax.

I like a retail sales tax.

If that’s all we had, then there would be no reason for anyone to
jump through hoops and engage in these financial shell games.


4 posted on 01/22/2012 6:54:55 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Since we know that it is 18 trillion then I guess the money really isn't hidden...just out of reach of the government.
5 posted on 01/22/2012 6:57:09 AM PST by WorldviewDad (following God instead of culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor

The way the article was written it sounded like all wealthy people are hiding money from the US government regardless of whether they were US citizens had ever set foot in the US.

I once knew an illegal alien who earned good ‘tax free’ money as a bartender and kept his money in either Isle or Wight or Isle of Man.


6 posted on 01/22/2012 6:57:35 AM PST by posterchild (I'm old enough to remember when journalists bothered to look things up on wikipedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
Candidate Barack Obama told us on the campaign trail: " The problem is, that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents, # 43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome so that now we have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back, $30,000 for every man woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic."

REALITY CHECK Obama presided over the biggest political heist in US history. The Obamanations (insiders and politicians) sucked up trillions under the guise of inheriting the "Bush financial crisis."

THIS MADE ME LAUGH OUT LOUD Obama COS Rahm Emanuel "suddenly" discovered he wanted to be Chicago's mayor---the little turn went before the mics and announced his campaign "raised $10 million in just a few weeks." Rahm also controlled the US Treasury as COS.

================================================

What the so-called "collapse" of the banking system wrought under Obama:

FOURTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS Behind The Real Size of the Bailout; A guide to the abbreviations, acronyms, and obscure programs that make up the $14 trillion federal bailout of Wall Street
SOURCE motherjones.com
Mon Dec. 21, 2009 12:23 PM PST

The price tag for the Wall Street bailout is often put at $700 billion—the size of the Troubled Assets Relief Program. But TARP is just the best known program in an array of more than 30 overseen by Treasury Department and Federal Reserve that have paid out or put aside money to bail out financial firms and inject money into the markets.

To get a sense of the size of the real $14 trillion bailout, see our chart at web site. Below, a guide to the pieces of the puzzle:

Treasury Department bailout programs
(Remember that Obama's Treasury Dept was controlled by his then-COS Rahm Emanuel---a G/S lobbyist in the WH)

Money Market Mutual Fund: In September 2008, the Treasury announced that it would insure the holdings of publicly offered money market mutual funds. According to the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), these guarantees could have potentially cost the federal government more than $3 trillion [PDF].

Public-Private Investment Fund: This joint Treasury-Federal Reserve program bought toxic assets from banks and brokerages—as much as $5 billion of assets per firm. According to SIGTARP, the government's potential exposure from the PPIF is between $500 million and $1 trillion [PDF].

TARP: As part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the Treasury has made loans to or investments more than 750 banks and financial institutions. $650 billion has been paid out (not including HAMP; see below). As of December 21, 2009, $117.5 billion of that has been repaid.

Government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) stock purchase: The Treasury has bought $200 million in preferred stock from Fannie Mae and another $200 million from Freddie Mac [PDF] to show that they "will remain viable entities critical to the functioning of the housing and mortgage markets."

GSE mortgage-backed securities purchase: Under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, the Treasury may buy mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. According to SIGTARP, these purchases could cost as much as $314 billion ---SNIP---.

LONG READ---go to web site to read more and checkout the shocking financial charts.

SOURCE http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/12/behind-real-size-bailout

7 posted on 01/22/2012 6:57:57 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The vast majority of this money is corporate. They do a lot of business overseas, so they keep their money there. It is the working capital of a business, nothing else.


8 posted on 01/22/2012 6:58:28 AM PST by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

What is the operational distinction between a VAT and a retail sales tax?


9 posted on 01/22/2012 6:59:21 AM PST by posterchild (I'm old enough to remember when journalists bothered to look things up on wikipedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
So why do they call it "offshore banking"?

Wait! Don't tell me. Cuz they're "offshore"?

Otherwise, tell me when Romney does something illegal. This guy's like Eliot Spitzer -- goes after people doing legal things because he doesn't like what they're doing.

10 posted on 01/22/2012 7:04:28 AM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: posterchild
I'm not an expert, but I think it goes like this:

Farmer grows wheat and sells it to a miller (VAT taxed) the miller grinds the wheat and sells it to a baker (VAT taxed) the baker makes bread and sells it to a supermarket (VAT Taxed) and the market sells it to you (VAT taxed). Hope you enjoy the $11 loaf of bread.

With a retail sales tax, the taxing begins and ends when the market sells a loaf to the consumer. Hope you enjoy your $3 loaf of bread.

11 posted on 01/22/2012 7:05:27 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And Psalm 49 has something to say about that.


12 posted on 01/22/2012 7:06:36 AM PST by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

"Hi there, Americans. Obama put me in charge of the trillion dollar stimulus. My son and brother are gonna help me disperse the money. "

================================

Offshore Fraudster had links to offshore fund run by VP Biden's relatives
Reuters on Yahoo | 2/23/09 | BY Ajay Kamalakaran

(Reuters) – A fund of offshore hedge funds run by two members of VP Joe Biden's family was marketed exclusively by offshore firms controlled by Texas financier Allen Stanford, charged by regulators with an $8 billion fraud, the Wall Street Journal said.

The Bidens $50 million fund was jointly branded between the Bidens' Paradigm Global Advisors LLC and the offshore Stanford Financial Group entity headquartered in Antigua, and was known as the Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund, the paper said. Stanford-related offshore companies marketed the Biden fund to investors and also invested about $2.7 million of their own money in the fund, the paper said, citing a lawyer for Paradigm.

Paradigm Global Advisors is owned through a holding company by the vice president Biden's son, Hunter, and Joe Biden's brother, James, according to the WSJ. Paradigm's attorney, Marc LoPresti, who represents Hunter Biden and James Biden, as well as Paradigm, told the paper he did not know which Stanford entity invested the roughly $2.7 million.

Marc LoPresti, who represents Hunter Biden and James Biden told the paper the Bidens NEVER met or communicated with Stanford. (/snicker)

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...

13 posted on 01/22/2012 7:07:39 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The Global Elite Are Hiding 18 Trillion Dollars In Offshore Banks

Nothing that a huge cut in spending, a huge cut in government, and a huge cut in taxes wouldn't remedy.

14 posted on 01/22/2012 7:10:53 AM PST by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Giving 10% to the Mormon church is called "buying votes". You don't think it counts??

This family has been supporting this church (cult) for ages. Let Mitt tell them that he's leaving the church and see what happens.

The Mormons started near where I am in NYS. A local, circa 1870 history book says the cult should be gone soon.

15 posted on 01/22/2012 7:15:45 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Assuming the same rate (otherwise there is no basis for comparison), is not the VAT only on the ‘value added?’ i.e. if the baker buys flour for 2$ and sells the baked good for $3 is the tax not on just the $1 difference?

In the end, as long as the tax mechanism is consistent to all parties and is hard to evade (and hence give unfair advantage to criminals), I’m more concerned with how much government takes in and what it is spent on. Solve that problem and then the taxation mechanism can be dealt with as a mere accounting problem.


16 posted on 01/22/2012 7:15:48 AM PST by posterchild (I'm old enough to remember when journalists bothered to look things up on wikipedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor
We don't therefore we are the taxed.
17 posted on 01/22/2012 7:17:56 AM PST by wolfcreek (Perry to Obama: Adios, MOFO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Hiding assets from the local government doesn’t sound like a bad thing. Keeping one’s assets in a number of countries and currencies sounds like embracing and celebrating diversity to me.


18 posted on 01/22/2012 7:20:48 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: posterchild
There is some merit to what you say, but in a complex economic system, in which goods need to be processed or exchanged along an extensive supply chain, government may "find" many opportunities to enact a VAT. Wheat and bread is somewhat straightforward, but what about a car? How many parts are involved? How many transactions are needed to gather the materials and construct an automobile? The government sees gold in such economic activity and can gather a "small" VAT multiple times. The result is an expensive consumer good, and a government with enough revenue to "solve every problem in the whole world".

I prefer a simple, direct, obvious tax on retail sales goods. No mystery about who is paying what, and if you want government revenue to go up or down, you see exactly what needs to be done.

19 posted on 01/22/2012 7:23:50 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Obviously, all of this tax avoidance means that governments around the world are missing out on a whole lot of money.”

Obviously to me at least is that governments around the world have come to believe that they are the owners of everything and are entitled to all wealth as they see fit.


20 posted on 01/22/2012 7:24:18 AM PST by bitterohiogunclinger (Proudly casting a heavy carbon footprint as I clean my guns ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

$18 trillion in off shore accounts? Seems a tad high. The electrons which represent this kind of money would probably sink one or two of those off shore island nations. Maybe that dope dem Congressman from Ga was on to something when he was curious if stationing more military personnel on Guam might capsize it.


21 posted on 01/22/2012 7:25:15 AM PST by Mouton (Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

A $ Trillion is a lot less these days than it used to be.


22 posted on 01/22/2012 7:28:30 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

It takes a pillage to raise a gov’t program.


23 posted on 01/22/2012 7:32:09 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: posterchild
What is the operational distinction between a VAT and a retail sales tax?

The retail sales tax is collected only at the very end of a long chain. Manufacturers sell parts to assembly houses, assembly houses sell products to retailers, all tax-free. The tax is collected - and sent to the government - only when retailers sell to the customer. Sometimes - like when selling spare parts - that chain can be measured in years because stocked parts in a warehouse are not yet taxed.

The VAT shortens that chain by collecting a portion of the tax as soon as the taxable work is performed. In other words, sales to intermediaries are taxed. This makes it harder for small businesses to stock the shelves because each item costs more. Also everyone has to go through a complex accounting procedure and apply VAT to whatever they sell. If a VAT law is complex enough (as they invariably become) it is a serious challenge to classify your products (and your business customer) and apply the right amount of tax. Today in the USA as long as my business customer has a proper certificate I just sell to him tax-free.

The VAT also helps in taxation by reducing the chances of a product to slip through untaxed. Even if some bodega owner forgets to ring a cash purchase, that bottle of sugar water came into his hands already VAT taxed, so the government loses not 100% of the sales tax but maybe 10%.

In other words, VAT does not help anyone but the government. If only they could, they'd post a tax man behind every worker, so that the worker would be taxed for every minute, and the business would be taxed, and the product would be taxed... The VAT is close to that, with the only difference that you, the business, hire and pay that tax man, and you are responsible for accuracy of his calculations.

24 posted on 01/22/2012 7:43:20 AM PST by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: BfloGuy

RE: Otherwise, tell me when Romney does something illegal. This guy’s like Eliot Spitzer — goes after people doing legal things because he doesn’t like what they’re doing.

_________________

We DO KNOW that unlike Newt, Romney has not (at least not yet ) divulged his tax returns.

We also now know from some intrepid source that Romney has an account in the Caymans with at least 8 Million dollars.

We DO NOT KNOW what currency that account is in.

If it is in Australian Dollars, he is probably earning about 4% on interest ( assuming it is a term deposit for say, a year ).

4% of 8 million is $320,000 (without even considering appreciation of the Aussie currency ).

Question -— Isn’t that INCOME of over $300,000 TAXABLE in the USA? If Romney did not declare that income in his 2011 tax returns, he is EVADING taxes and is liable for prosecution.

If he is not prosecuted, then where’s justice?

I know of a Korean immigrant whose father left him an inheritance of $500,000 3 years ago IN KOREA.

The money belonged to his family and was earned IN KOREA. It NEVER came to the USA. Yet, the IRS somehow got to know about it ( from the immigrant’s bitter ex wife ). Now he’s being given a hard time by the IRS who wants to lay claim on that money.

Compare this to Romney potentially getting away with his interest from $8 million, is this justice? Is this fair?

If the government can snoop on your private investments made overseas. In what sense are we still a free country?


26 posted on 01/22/2012 9:05:53 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

RE: Hiding assets from the local government doesn’t sound like a bad thing. Keeping one’s assets in a number of countries and currencies sounds like embracing and celebrating diversity to me.

____________

Speaking of diversity... Congressman Charles Rangel of NY was discovered to own a VILLA in the Dominican Republic from which he makes money of RENTING to rich tourists and executives who visits the Island. He NEVER declared his income from that investment in his tax forms.

He was censured for this ( among the many other ethics violations he had ).

YET, I don’t read ANY news of the IRS going after him for failure to declare that income.

GO FIGURE.

Heck, I’d go for a verbal censure anytime over having to fork overseas income to the IRS.


27 posted on 01/22/2012 9:11:03 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

>>...But it is what he said next that is troubling -
“And if there’s an opportunity to save taxes, we like anybody else in this country will follow that opportunity.” -
I certainly believe him when he says that too...<<

You find that *troubling*? I find it a near sacred duty to starve the federal leviathan of as much of the fruits of our labors a humanly and legally *possible*.

To make sure I understand you correctly, you are saying you find it “troubling” that someone would seek to legally minimize their tax-burden? If I follow the logic, do you also think the govt has too few of our confiscated dollars to spend?

As for the rest of your article, the only thing that comes to mind is, “So stinkin’ what? If the govt policy(s) encourages folks to manage their finances and investments this way — So what?” I’m not rich and I don’t have offshore anything, but neither do I envy or regret those who do.

Now, I’ve said before and I will say it again that defending Romeny is the *last* thing I want to do, but you class-warfare types keep putting us in that situation. There is NO controversy there, unless you have evidence of some *illegal* activity. So, please knock off the class-warfare stuff.

Honestly, with no offense intended, despite any assurance one may offer to the contrary, the only thing a class-warfare argument does is make you appear bitter, petty and envious over someone else’s success.


28 posted on 01/22/2012 9:16:34 AM PST by jaydee770
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jaydee770

I have a crazy idea,, why doesn’t OUR law allow our banking system do whatever the Caymans do? Wouldn’t it be fun to have 14 trillion washing through our banks?
I know that would ruin the NWO fun of ruining the USA and that the last thing the elite wants to see is a robust all powerful USA,,,
But unrestricted energy development,,and becoming the worlds tax haven. This country would explode at the seams with business,,,

God forgive me how i hate the evil bastards who have stolen our freedom,,


29 posted on 01/22/2012 9:54:29 AM PST by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Sounds like the problem is taxation, not the funds.


30 posted on 01/22/2012 10:10:33 AM PST by Hoosier-Daddy ( "It does no good to be a super power if you have to worry what the neighbors think." BuffaloJack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Conservatives came to power promising to close the elite’s corporatists tax loopholes in the past through instituting a flat tax.

We called it corporate welfare. We called for a flat tax so no one could buy power for tax breaks and anti-competition measures. The power to hand out tax loopholes gives Washington and their pals too much power and influence over small business and the middle class.

Perry has a great tax plan for us to adopt in the name of ending Romneylike tax loops.

McCain tried to curtail free speech in elections claiming donations from “special interests” buys power in DC. He did not like the conservative groups that went after him and other Rinos in elections. He was not really worried about corporate tax loophole and anti-competition purchaces of power. He sure was not worried about corporations passing their losses off to taxpayers through the purchasing of DC power.

Conservatives should stand up against “croney capitalism” and call for reforms in what is avialable to corporations and unions for purchase in DC.


31 posted on 01/22/2012 10:15:20 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor

I can’t condemn in others what I would do if I had the means and opportunity.


32 posted on 01/22/2012 1:27:26 PM PST by Mountain Troll (My investment plan - Canned food and shotguns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

>>...I have a crazy idea,, why doesn’t OUR law allow our banking system do whatever the Caymans do?...<<

I’m sure the list of reasons that the statists might offer would approach encyclopedic in scale; however, it probably is all double-speak that boils down to:
Because we would have to severely alter our tax-code which would affect our ability to take money from one group and hand it out like halloween candy to another group in order to influence voting to our benefit.

Just a guess...


33 posted on 01/23/2012 4:41:32 AM PST by jaydee770
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson