The Paradise Papers

[ArcadiaGP]

Upcoming massive 13 million page leak called “Paradise Papers” will soon expose many celebrities and politicians offshore financial affairs.

The papers are a huge batch of leaked documents mostly from offshore law firm Appleby, along with corporate registries in 19 tax jurisdictions, which reveal the financial dealings of politicians, celebrities, corporate giants and business leaders.

The 13.4 million documents were passed to German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung and then shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ). Panorama has led research for the BBC as part of a global investigation involving nearly 100 other media organisations, including the Guardian, in 67 countries.

Paradise Papers: Tax haven secrets of the super-rich exposed - BBC News

 

[Ark]

Pretty thoroughly bipartisan, and implicates people from all over the world.

This really shouldn't be news to anyone, but rich people hide unimaginable sums of money. There is no amount of wealth or income above which these people will ever be content with paying the same taxes that you and I do. It doesn't even matter to them if they can really ever spend their squirreled-away money. All that matters to them is keeping it out of the hands of the government. It's a sick, greedy ideology, and we would have a society that would be the envy of the world if they even paid taxes at a rate that the average American is accustomed to.

But, you know, politicians can be bought remarkably cheap and there is exactly a 0.0% chance this expose will change anything.

 

[wtburnette]

Pretty thoroughly bipartisan, and implicates people from all over the world.

This really shouldn't be news to anyone, but rich people hide unimaginable sums of money. There is no amount of wealth or income above which these people will ever be content with paying the same taxes that you and I do. It doesn't even matter to them if they can really ever spend their squirreled-away money. All that matters to them is keeping it out of the hands of the government. It's a sick, greedy ideology, and we would have a society that would be the envy of the world if they even paid taxes at a rate that the average American is accustomed to.

But, you know, politicians can be bought remarkably cheap and there is exactly a 0.0% chance this expose will change anything.

Yep, the thing to remember about the rich is that the never, ever pay their fair share. They have lawyers who find all of the loopholes and other advantages. I saw an article the other day crying how the rich pay about 90% of all taxes collected. I didn't read it, because I knew two things, either 1) it's correct, but doesn't matter, or 2) it's not true and it was just propaganda. My guess is, like most articles, it was somewhere in the middle. I'm sure the wealthy pay a lot more of the money going into taxes, however, I'm also equally certain that they never pay an equal percentage compared to the middle class.

 

[phylodog]

I tend to lean toward the equality side of the spectrum. As an example, let's say that right now I can buy an apple for $1. If I hit the Powerball Lottery Wednesday and am worth $200,000,000.00 overnight I don't feel I should then have to pay $10,000 for that same apple simply because I can afford it. In my mind, taxes paid are (or should be) for services rendered; schools, roads, defense, etc.. I don't have a huge issue charging people less who can't pay their "fair" share but I do have an issue overcharging other people simply because they've managed to acquire more money than most.

 

[wtburnette]

I tend to lean toward the equality side of the spectrum. As an example, let's say that right now I can buy an apple for $1. If I hit the Powerball Lottery Wednesday and am worth $200,000,000.00 overnight I don't feel I should then have to pay $10,000 for that same apple simply because I can afford it. In my mind, taxes paid are (or should be) for services rendered; schools, roads, defense, etc.. I don't have a huge issue charging people less who can't pay their "fair" share but I do have an issue overcharging other people simply because they've managed to acquire more money than most.

I agree with that example.

The difference, from my perspective is that if I'm paying ~30% of my income to taxes (made up numbers, just using for the sake of argument), I expect someone wealthy to pay at least the same percentage. That's not what happens though. Due to loopholes, special favors and other advantages, the wealthy person will likely pay a fraction of the percentage I pay. It doesn't matter that the 30% coming out of my paycheck is $600 and the 30% the wealthy person would pay is $600k. Yes, they would pay more, but they would be left with 70% of their pay, just like me. Tell me how that is unfair because they pay more?

 

[phylodog]

I find it unfair because they're paying 1000x more for the same services than you and I are. The use of percentages is (in my opinion) an attempt to justify charging people differently for the same thing(s). People with more money typically buy more stuff so they're paying more in sales taxes than those without. Even with the loopholes I'd wager to bet most wealthy people are paying more than their "fair" share compared to the average citizen. I find it difficult to blame someone for not wanting to pay 10x, 100x, or 1000x more in takes than someone else because they've managed to become successful.

 

[wtburnette]

I guess we just have different perspectives. Based on percentages, I keep 70% of my income, they keep 70% of their income. I don't see that as unfair because they make 10x what I do (or more). The amount they pay is still 30% and the amount they keep is still 70%. They buy more stuff because they can afford to. I'm not sure where that even factors in.

All that said, I will agree our tax system needs changed. I've seen plenty of things proposed that make sense, but what doesn't make sense is sticking with the abhorrent system we have.

 

[phylodog]

Agree with you there. I just don’t want to see one which punishes success. “The more you make, the more we take” doesn’t sit well with me.

 

[churchmouse]

Agree with you there. I just don’t want to see one which punishes success. “The more you make, the more we take” doesn’t sit well with me.

Flat tax. Across the board. No loop holes and no favors. We all pay the same rate on what we buy. Easy peasy.
Even a hooker and a drug dealer would be paying.

 

[phylodog]

I’m good with that approach.

 

[churchmouse]

I’m good with that approach.

It would eliminate so much Bravo Sierra.

 

[phylodog]

I agree. It would be nice if it could be implemented and left to work but I suspect it wouldn’t take long before changes would be made. People living in the cities would complain that people in the country weren’t paying enough because they grew their own vegetables rather than buying them (and paying the tax) and a myriad of other examples. Wouldn’t take long and it would be completely adulterated.

 

[wtburnette]

I agree with flat tax as well, but agree with phylodog that it would likely be a doomed proposition. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried.

 

[Tactically Fat]

There's a big difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.

One of them is smart and entirely legal. One isn't so much.

We should ALL do what we can to legally avoid taxes.

 

[churchmouse]

I agree. It would be nice if it could be implemented and left to work but I suspect it wouldn’t take long before changes would be made. People living in the cities would complain that people in the country weren’t paying enough because they grew their own vegetables rather than buying them (and paying the tax) and a myriad of other examples. Wouldn’t take long and it would be completely adulterated.

Well of course it would. But if implemented I am sure the debt could be greatly reduced by the influx of cash to the national coffers.
I fear we would have to clean house on the hill and start anew before this would work.

 

[wtburnette]

Well of course it would. But if implemented I am sure the debt could be greatly reduced by the influx of cash to the national coffers.
I fear we would have to clean house on the hill and start anew before this would work.

Any meaningful change would be predicated by a housecleaning of our politicians, followed by term limits and other necessary changes.

 

[churchmouse]

Any meaningful change would be predicated by a housecleaning of our politicians, followed by term limits and other necessary changes.

The sad point to be made here is we already have term limits. We just do not use them.

 

[T.Lex]

A flat tax for personal income is an interesting idea, probably even morally just.

But it leaves corporate income taxes in an awkward place. Awkwardly unworkable. Well, more awkwardly unworkable than the current awkward system.

And, it leaves out non-profits. Or doesn't. Which is a different issue.

 

[churchmouse]

A flat tax for personal income is an interesting idea, probably even morally just.

But it leave corporate income taxes in an awkward place. Awkwardly unworkable. Well, more awkwardly unworkable than the current awkward system.

And, it leaves our non-profits. Or doesn't. Which is a different issue.

Good points.

 

[Spear Dane]

Flat tax. Across the board. No loop holes and no favors. We all pay the same rate on what we buy. Easy peasy.
Even a hooker and a drug dealer would be paying.

Damn, you're right. Never thought about it but such a system would easily capture taxes on under the table and illegal employment.