Posted on 04/12/2006 5:11:46 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
U.S. Seeks PayPal Customer Data In Attempt to Find Tax Evaders By ROB WELLS April 12, 2006; Page D2
The Justice Department has asked PayPal Inc., the online-payment-processing unit of Internet auctioneer eBay Inc., to turn over some customer records as part of a tax-evasion probe, a top tax official said.
U.S. District Judge James Ware in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in February issued a "John Doe" summons to PayPal, of San Jose, Calif., for the records....
The summons requires PayPal to provide account and transaction records relating to U.S. taxpayers with MasterCard, Visa and American Express cards issued by banks based in tax-haven countries. The request covers Dec. 31, 1999, through Dec. 31, 2004. PayPal spokeswoman Amanda Pires said the company is evaluating its options. She said the request covers banks based in 35 countries, yet PayPal is available in only 10 of those countries.
In a court filing, the Justice Department said foreign countries such as Antigua, Luxembourg, Panama and Switzerland have bank-secrecy laws that compel U.S. investigators to seek records from other sources, such as credit-card issuers.
(subscription required to access full article)
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Ruh Roh
However, the current laws can be used to justify this sort of snooping, so.....
-Eric
Until then, bust the crooks.
I am an ILLEGAL alien from Mexico.
So go screw yourself - I'm special, and protected by your boss.
So keep your stinkin' mitts off my Pay Pal account.
Regards,
Juan from L.A.
Julio from Chicago
Juanita in Brooklyn
[etc, etc, etc, (20 million times) ]
ps: Where's MY Child Tax Credit you stoo-pid Gringos?
Sounds like a fishing expedition.
That approach makes the most sense. Having a 30% sales tax on all goods and services will have too much of a negative impact on consumption putting us into a recession and will be too inflationary thereby eroding the value of savings. But we need a consumption tax so we can be more competitive in the global markets.
When taxes on income are so well hidden through payroll deductions that the average citizen is happy if they get a big refund, it is clear that the cost of government has been hidden as well. Shifting from an income tax to a consumption tax brings the cost of government services into fuller daily disclosure to the average citizens. That is exactly why supporters of Big and Bigger Government, especially supporters of the Welfare-Warfare State are against it.
Well said.
The FairTax eliminates the problem which is the topic of the article. It eliminates the income tax, withholding and the IRS. A flat tax retains the problem because it's an income tax and it keeps withholding and the IRS.
Financial privacy is greatly increased with the FairTax -- only required to divulge income for purpose of collecting future social security benefits. A flat tax maintains the IRS stranglehold that severely violates financial privacy. Not to mention the IRS deems a person guilty until proven innocent -- a perversion of justice.
Illegal aliens will pay the FairTax at the register but be ineligible to collect social security benefits. The FairTax makes USA made products more price-competitive -- more attractive -- in foreign markets.
The FairTax will make United States the mega tax haven of the world. Returning trillions of US dollars that are now offshore and sucking in a trillion dollars in foreign money. (PayPal "problem"* solved.) The FairTax will cause an economic boom with major increases in new jobs and businesses across the board.
The FairTax strips out embedded taxes and compliance costs and in effect charges them off at the cash register. Thus it is a wash. Especially since foreign made products now sold in the United States have about one-quarter the embedded US taxes in them as USA made products.
The only US taxes embedded in foreign products come from warehouse, distribution and retail. None of the manufacturing and supply chain of foreign-made products have US taxes embedded in them. Thus three-fourths of price decrease will apply to USA made products. Foreign made products will see only about one-quarter of the price decrease.
*Problem in quotes because it is only a problem in a anti-free-market perspective.
>>Worker gets $75 for a day's work with which to pay his bills;<<
Excuse me, I have FICA on the brain from working on my own taxes. Worker gets $70.
BTW, last year my federal return was 31 pages long and cost $1250 to be professionally prepared. I dare not do it myself.
This in itself is a direct tax that results in zero capital investment. It is the Full Employment for Accountants and Tax Attorneys law.
If people are worried about "inflation" and loss to the economy they wrongly speculate would come from replacing a tax on income with a tax on spending, why are they totally silent about the horrid costs of filing, complying, processing and auditing?
All these billions of dollars are pure waste. We might as well use the Federal Reserve Notes for cattle feed or concrete filler. Not a single shed tear over the forest of trees that must be consumed each year for the paperwork alone.
Something is wrong when the more complex system, the more costly system, and the system that destroys more liberty and privacy than any other is the one we should use next year.
The owner of TracFone is one such person who is raking in profits while we pay the social costs of Mexico.
1) Employer pays a worker $100 for a day's work, but has to withhold $30 for income tax. Worker gets $75 for a day's work with which to pay his bills;
2) Employer pays a worker $100 for a day's work. Employee gets $100 with which to pay his bills. When he does so, there is a sales tax of 30% charged.
The biggest difference is the guy who saved his whole life under system 1, now has his life's savings taxed again when he has to buy stuff at an inflated price. There is also the psychological difference of seeing that 30% added on which is going to make more people try to avoid it by cheating the system or simply not buying.
On paper a sales tax sounds nice and friendly. However once people start avoiding the tax, the tax collector will employ an even more intrusive method to individuals. Right now the only taxable transaction most individuals have to worry about is their wages. The sales tax makes every single purchase a taxable event with the buyer being liable for the tax. The buyer only transfers that liability to the seller if he has a proper receipt. The new tax collector will have the authority to audit every single purchase an individual makes to ensure taxes were paid. I am at a lose for where all this new found liberty is. The new tax collector will do anal exams on individuals or else there will be massive tax evasion. I agree, there will be significant compliance cost savings, but the liberty arguement is shallow.
I agree, there will be significant compliance cost savings, but the liberty arguement is shallow.
The FairTax-promotes-liberty argument is the opposite of shallow. It's right on target. Your boogieman is shallow, and that's an understatement.
Under the FairTax only the retailer must keep records of the sales tax collected. The consumer has no obligation. Besides, your boogieman that the government will or can hold every person, or most people or one tenth of people accountable for every sales receipt is absurd beyond belief. It's several fold easier, simpler and more effective to hold the retailer accountable than the consumer. And that's why the FairTax holds the retailer accountable and not the consumer.
The receipt is the consumers only evidence that he has paid the tax and is required if the consumer does not want to pay tax on the item again should the government decide to audit him. And yes they can just decide to audit him, if they think he may owe tax. And yes he must produce documents if requested. It is all spelled out in the Fair Tax bill. Remember, the first thing the FairTax bill does is make the consumer liable for the tax.
The receipt is the consumers only evidence that he has paid the tax and is required if the consumer does not want to pay tax on the item again should the government decide to audit him.
That applies to selling a used item. Providing proof that the sales tax was already paid on the item. A house or a car, for example. The retail seller of the house and car also recorded the sales tax paid. The vast majority, 99% or more of consumer purchases are never resold. The government may audit a business it suspects of evading the tax by making consumption purchases using the business certificate to do so.
Remember, the first thing the FairTax bill does is make the consumer liable for the tax.
The first to be held accountable for remitting the tax to the government is the businesses. You claim wrong. You claim the government will play cop over the consumer/retailer transaction to ensure the consumer pays the sales tax to the retailer. The government polices the retailer to ensure the retailer remits the tax to the government.
I stand by my statement that: "The FairTax-promotes-liberty argument is the opposite of shallow. It's right on target. Your boogieman is shallow, and that's an understatement."
a_g, pigdog, Principled, you guys want to weigh in?
1. This is where the fairtax makes the Consumer LIABLE for sales tax unless they receive a purchasers receipt. This applies to all sales of goods and services. It is not for the selling of used goods as you stated in your comment.
`(d) Liability for Tax -
`(1) IN GENERAL- The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.
`(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER- A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.
2. Here is where the fairtax requires people to produce papers upon request.
`In all disputes concerning taxes imposed by this subtitle, the person engaged in a dispute with the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary, as the case may be, shall have the burden of production of documents and records but the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary shall have the burden of persuasion.
3. And who is subject to such audits and summons? Why all 'persons' are. There are no exceptions in the bill to protect buyers. All they have to do is think you might have a liability, which any person who buys something has a potential liablity.
`(a) Summons- Persons are subject to administrative summons by the sales tax administering authority for records, documents, and testimony required by the sales tax administering authority to accurately determine liability for tax under this subtitle.
Pigdog will do his usually distortions and will demonstrate an usual ability to twist and spin the truth. But there are no protections for individuals in the bill from extreme anal examination from the new and improved tax collectors.
`In all disputes concerning taxes imposed by this subtitle, the person engaged in a dispute with the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary, as the case may be, shall have the burden of production of documents and records but the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary shall have the burden of persuasion.
You call that a protection???? It is not beyond a reasonable doubt, iit is simply a 'burden of persuasion'. That is a much much lower standard. They simply have to convince a judge you probably owe money.
The flat tax laws could be used to justify this type of snooping too. Only the FairTax defangs the IRS and will tax all the illegals in our country. Can the flat tax catch and tax all of the illegals?
It is nice that they pay attorney's fees in some cases, but you not only have to win but show that the government was not substantially justified. Only slightly better than the current system in that reguard. Certainly not a major protection of your freedom.
It doesn't defang it at all. It renames it.
Really?
From the bill:
SEC. 301. PHASE-OUT OF ADMINISTRATION OF REPEALED FEDERAL TAXES.
(a) Appropriations- Appropriations for any expenses of the Internal Revenue Service including processing tax returns for years prior to the repeal of the taxes repealed by title I of this Act, revenue accounting, management, transfer of payroll and wage data to the Social Security Administration for years after fiscal year 2009 shall not be authorized.
(b) Records- Federal records related to the administration of taxes repealed by title I of this Act shall be destroyed by the end of fiscal year 2009, except that any records necessary to calculate Social Security benefits shall be retained by the Social Security Administration and any records necessary to support ongoing litigation with respect to taxes owed or refunds due shall be retained until final disposition of such litigation.
Defunding and destroying records isn't a defanging???? Hmmmm....what do you call it?
You call that a protection???? It is not beyond a reasonable doubt, iit is simply a 'burden of persuasion'. That is a much much lower standard. They simply have to convince a judge you probably owe money.
Convince a judge that John Brown owes ten dollars and he'll tell you you're wasting the taxpayers money pursuing a frivolous amount.
The judge will quickly assess the situation: How much is the dollar amount the government agent claims the individual/person owes in sales tax? Is it less than $200 or more than $1,000? The judge knows that 80% of the taxes will be collected by major retailers. Is it worth the cost to go after the suspect against the risk of the government losing the case and having to pay the defendant's attorneys' fees, accountancy fees, and other reasonable professional fees incurred.
A smart and logical person would think that the government will concentrate it's policing powers first on retailers, next on black-market tax evaders and almost nothing on law abiding citizens. That said, you cheat, you deserve to pay the price.
Unlike the 60,000+ page tax code that the IRS can use to snare anyone it sets it's sights on harassing/abusing (IRS Abuse Reports), the FairTax has 132 pages which mostly applies to businesses, not individuals. The vast majority of individuals will pay the FairTax at the cash register, put the receipt in their pocket and that will be the end of their compliance. They'll happily walk out the door with their purchase tarnished only by feeling raped by the federal government.
The FairTax promotes liberty by abolishing the IRS, eliminates income taxes and withholding while calling for the repeal of the 16th amendment.
It is nice that they pay attorney's fees in some cases, but you not only have to win but show that the government was not substantially justified.
Addressing the court: Exhibit "A" is my clients receipt showing the sales tax paid for the new car he purchased. Exhibit "B" is my clients receipt showing the sales tax paid for the new house he purchased. Exhibit "C" is my clients receipt showing the sales tax paid for the diamond broach he purchased. The government's charge against my client is a waste of valuable taxpayers money. My client exercises his right under Section 507 of the FairTax Act to be reimbursed for his cost incurred by this frivolously and unjustified charge against him.
The people that end up in tax court will be tax cheats, not law abiding citizens like in the above example. Tax cheats risk having to pay the price for their violations.
Only slightly better than the current system in that reguard. Certainly not a major protection of your freedom.
It's a thousand times better than the present system: IRS Abuse Reports
The vast majority of individuals will pay the FairTax at the cash register, put the receipt in their pocket and that will be the end of their compliance. They'll happily walk out the door with their purchase tarnished only by feeling raped by the federal government.
No, most people just claim the standard deduction and use the short forms, so itemizing things like mortgages, charitible giving, real estate taxes, education expenses are moot.
NOT MOOT TO ME, and my clients. The vast majority of my clients itemize. You cannot dismiss the very real invasion of their privacy, under color of law, under color of right....that is a DIRECT violation of the 4th amendment.
NOT MOOT, not moot at all.
People that end up in tax court are almost always tax cheats. Audits are another story as many honest taxpayers get audited. It really is not that huge of a protection unless it is a total fishing expedition that turns up nothing.
Well you don't service the vast majority of people. Some 70% of filers use short forms.
And the sales tax does nothing to stop those violations. All it takes for the Sale Tax police to ask for you to turn over all your receipts is a simple suspicion that you may owe tax. Where is the 4th Amendment protection there? There is none, so get off your high horse.
SO WHAT? Are our rights dependent on the number of people impacted? NO! They are rights. Period.
MOREOVER, when banks/brokerages/mortgage companies file their 1099's, 1098's....they do it en masse, and transmit it to the IRS. Whether the individual taxpayer itemizes or not, the IRS is possessed of the information....in direct violation of the 4th.
The Constitution CANNOT be amended by statute. The IRS, the income tax scheme is all extra-constitutional.
So where's the problem? I have EVERY receipt I have gotten for the last 3 years at home. Makes a damn good budget template when you start collating that data.
Well today the majority of people just earn their wages and that is the end of their compliance. Tehy have to file a tax form, but under the sales tax you must file to get your monthly family consumption allowance.
As will the sales tax be. There will still be massive 4th Amendment violations under the sales tax. The government will still look into to every transaction. Any $2 Trillion tax collection scheme is going to violate the 4th Amendment. They can ask for anyone's financial papers for any reason.
Audits are another story as many honest taxpayers get audited.
You're right, that's true under the present system. It won't be with the FairTax.
The number of persons audited under the FairTax will probably be less, perhaps much less than 10% those audited under the present system. And when a person is audited: "Here's my sales receipt showing the tax paid on the new car purchase. Good bye Mr. government employee, have a nice day."
It really is not that huge of a protection unless it is a total fishing expedition that turns up nothing.
"You want to see the receipt showing the sales tax paid? Here it is, have a nice day." People now live in fear of an IRS audit. They won't fear a FairTax audit because there will be so few of them and the remedy is so simple; just show the receipts. Forty-five states have a sales tax and I haven't heard of any consumer being audited for not paying the state sales tax.
You imply that a FairTax audit will be as common, as intrusive and abusive as IRS audits are now. They wont be.
lol. Funny, in a sad reality sort of way...
Well today the majority of people just earn their wages and that is the end of their compliance. Tehy [sic] have to file a tax form, but under the sales tax you must file to get your monthly family consumption allowance.
You're comparing the drudgery of doing a personal income tax return or paying to have H&R Block to do it for you to the FairTax simplicity of filling out an index card and sending it to the government! Which isn't even a requirement unless the person chose to receive the monthly prebate. There's a huge cost and time discrepancy! The current system requires much more time and money of the person than will the FairTax. You feign that you're too incompetent to recognize the difference.
Plus this: With the FairTax each person will be reminded at the cash register how much money government spending is costing them.
So, what's your interest in preserving the status quo????
Tax preparer? Software purveyor? Researcher Software purveyor? Lobbyist? How does the current monstrosity line your pockets??????
He got his feelings hurt long ago and this is personal to him. He will tell you he thinks eliminating the income tax will be bad for his business - residential home construction.... really, he'll say that.
He has it taxed presently when he buys stuff Rightie ... we've been through this many times and you still won't believe that it's true.
There are tax costs embedded in everything you buy at present - hidden, but there, adding nothing but additional useless, non-productive cost.
Each of your points in this post is wrong - and that's been pointed out to you several times.
Wrong here, too, Rightie.
That's not a "simple reading", but a simple-minded one by a person horribly biased against anything that changes his present tax evasion techniques.
You've obviously managed to steer yourself away from any serious IRS invasions of privacy in your business as presently YOU are the guilty one no matter what they claim unless you can prove otherwise.
And good luch going to Tax Court (where they try to push you for intimidation) since the entry fee there is quite high in many states ... and it's not recoverable even if you win.
There you go again piggie. Spamming me with a bunch of asinine posts that say absolutely nothing. You can't refute with a real arguement so you just spam. You are nothing but a one-issue shill.
HACKS IN WASHINGTON DC:
How about a tax AMNESTY! You are always pimping for an illegal alien amnesty. How about something for US citizens?
I am also in the personal position of having saved all my life and now living off my investments. The Fair Tax would amount to double taxation for people like me.
Are we now in the position that we must continue with this horrid system of taxation year after year because we cannot bear the cost of making the transition? This is like the person who is spending $1000 per month on car repairs because he cannot bear the thought of buying a new car for $20,000.
With this mentality, we will pass this system on to our grandchildren. We are living with a legal and financial legacy that was imposed on us by persons long dead who could not bring themselves to do the right thing. If there is any increased tax burden to certain retirees, these can be somewhat mitigated in the transition law.
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.