“As noted, your math is off (2010-38=1972). Also, Palin is 46, not 44. So her family moved from Skagway to Wasila when she was 6 in 1970.
But considering Whitehorse is a much quicker trip from Skagway than the nearest Alaska city (Juneau), it's not any surprise her family might have gone there. Unless there is evidence they didn't pay, I'd sat this is a non-story.”
“Probably not. "Hustle" can mean "hurry" as well as "cheat." I thought differently yesterday and so posted on TPM but found out today they lived in Skagway, not Wasila. Whitehorse is only 2 hours from Skagway, while Juneau is 4 hours including 2 ferries, so it would make more sense to go there for urgent medical care. I now think this is a non-story and have withdrawn the blog post I made yesterday at TPM.”
“Wow, this is a great catch that needs to be publicized more widely. Palin is such a hypocrite. I have found the entire story in the Canadian Press news service but I will credit you for catching it when I blog it on TPM.
“This is the truth! One problem you can add to this: by not requiring evildoers to admit to their guilt, it becomes a lot harder for individual plaintiffs to sue for their damages. Essentially, you'd have to re-prove the entire case, and no individual plaintiff has the resources the Department of Justice does.”
jukesgrrl on Nov 10, 2009 at 02:18:14
“Total 100% agreement with you and Arianna. This absurd and damaging practice has to stop.”
“The NBA no longer allows players to go straight to the pros. I don't think that's fair. If a star high school player can't get into a good basketball school (arguably Derrick Rose's situation since he allegedly had someone take the SAT for him), he loses a year of training on top of losing salary. Not everyone is college material.
I think that basketball schools should give star players multi-million insurance policies against a career-ending injury so they'll have an incentive to stay in college if they want to.”
“It costs foreign governments money. That's why TJN lists it. And contrary to your post above, if the Secretary of State is responsible for incorporations, that's where the blame goes for non-identification of the beneficial owner.”
“I think you are mistaken that the foreigner could incorporate in any state and get the same secrecy advantage. Here's what thedelawarecompany.com says about Delaware law: "Ownership in a Delaware LLC or corporation is private and easily transferable. The State of Delaware does not record owners' names and there is no requirement to file or record the transfer of ownership." In other words, permanently hiding the beneficial owner is simple; don't record transfer of ownership.
By contrast, here is what the state of New York requires: "The corporation must also keep a record containing the names and addresses of all shareholders, the number and class of shares held by each and the dates when they respectively became the owners of record thereof. (See Section 624 of the Business Corporation Law.)" All owners names must be recorded, hence they could be subpoenaed. I'm not a lawyer, but it does not sound like you can legally hide beneficial ownership in New York state. Thus, there is a secrecy advantage for Delaware compared to other states.
Yes, the foreign country could enact requirements for disclosure of foreign business entities, bank accounts, etc. Obviously people evade those laws, and Delaware law makes it easier to evade those laws by not having a legal requirement to make the beneficial owner identifiable. This is exactly how bank secrecy laws in Switzerland or other "secrecy jurisdictions" (the Tax Justice Network's preferred term) make it possible for US citizens to evade the Form 5471 requirement.”
richdibo on Nov 1, 2009 at 20:47:21
“I would guess that the identity of the shareholders could be discoverable through court proceedings in any state of incorporation. All corporations should have a record of its shareholders in the treasurer's stock registers. I was referring to information in the public record or readily accessible by the states. I don't expect that that list that NY requires is submitted to the NY Secretary of State.
I still don't see how Delaware law make it any easier to evade laws to operate as a tax haven.
The issue is evading law that require disclose of the beneficial owners, such as Form 5471 requirements. The Obama administration is intensely focused at enforcing these laws.”
“The Tax Justice Network makes pronouncements on a lot of UK jurisdictions; Jersey is one its favorite targets. In any event, if you look at the index, you will see that the UK (City of London) comes in at #5. So I think your mistrust is unwarranted.”
Littlewords on Nov 1, 2009 at 17:49:56
“Right, it is always better to go with facts over gut. Fearing something because one does not understand is often easily remedied if the person simply exerts themselves and thus 'learns something in the process.'”
“How about stating something specific you see as incorrect in the article?”
richdibo on Nov 1, 2009 at 17:28:31
“I could write a book. Please read Salty's posts. The application of federal tax law does not concern the state of incorporation unless there are some state law provisions that determine facts.
Delaware does not determine federal tax law.
However, after reading a post about foreign corps using US subsidiaries for tax deferral purposes (very technical foreign tax), I understand some concerns that the UK Tax Justice Group may have. But Delaware is irrelevant to this matter and offended foreign jurisdictions could correct the purported abuse by legislating schemes included in US tax law that prevent US corps from engaging such abuse (Sub-Part F). Obviously any discussion of this this is beyond the scope of the writer.
The writer is quick to point the finger at Delaware. Its like say that harlot Madonna is responsible for assassinating Lincoln, political corruption in Peru and Kin Jong's ingrown toenail.
The article is gibberish and accuses the Obama administration of waffling in their effort to combat tax havens that are used for tax evasion (a crime). Obama has directed effort at the 90 Billion of uncollected tax from evasion in off-shore accounts.”
SaltySaltillo on Nov 1, 2009 at 17:26:24
“OK, I'll bite:
calling Delaware a "tax jurisdiction" is misleading and not exactly right.
Calling Delaware a "tax shelter" is misleading and not exactly right.
The "fun facts" Delaney then offers about Delaware say nothing at all about taxes. They just say a lot of companies get formed in Delaware and the Delaware government makes a lot of money collecting franchise taxes from those companies.
The last "fun fact" Delaney offers, if you read carefully, has nothing to do with Delaware at all. In fact it is just a mention about how much money is deposited in US banks by foreigners. What does that have to do with Delaware or taxes? Nothing, but Delaney wants to stir the put of insinuation, panic, and hysteria by throwing it in.
Finally, the comment by Nichole Tichon if you read carefully says nothing about Delaware. It is another juxtaposition designed to provoke a knee-jerk reaction. With a quote out of context we don't know what problems Tichon is actually referring to. Delaney wants you to think she is talking about Delaware.
But she could just as easily be complaining about the way US multinational corporations create companies in Caribbean tax havens through which they conduct their foreign business activities thereby deferring US income tax on income earned in foreign countries.”
First, as to US tax law, I explicitly stated that the company would have tax liabilities in the US. But you are mistaken that the money ever has to be repatriated. Earned in Germany, spent in Germany, why would there have to be repatriation?
Second, because of the tax liability in the US, the US-German double taxation treaty would mean the income is not subject to German tax. It's already been "taxed" in the US.”
SaltySaltillo on Nov 1, 2009 at 17:37:05
“And I think you are mistaken. The scenario you have described is called tax evasion and it is a crime in both the USA and Germany. In this particular case it involves defrauding both the US and German tax authorities, first by ignoring the tax liability in the US and then by defrauding German authorities by representing to them that the tax liability was actually paid in the US when in fact it was not.
Consider the details: If a German investor wishes to form a US subsidiary, through which to own its German money-making assets, let's see how this plays out.
The assets in Germany make money which is then kept in German banks. But the money is not the investor's yet. It belongs to the owner of the assets... the US company. If the US company refuses to pay US taxes on money earned in Germany, it incurs a tax liability which, if it goes unpaid, can result in an IRS seizure of the US companies assets, even if those assets include stock or other assets owned in Germany. German authorities would cooperate with the IRS in facilitating the seizure of these assets. Further, the double taxation treaties don't get you off the hook for a liability owed in another country until the liability is actually paid or satisfied. I leave it up to you to do the leg work to verify that this is the case.”
“The foreign company benefits by incorporating in the USA because of its tax deferral rules. If the profits never come to the US, they never get taxed at all. With bank secrecy, the home country tax authorities can't find you. I've posted a little more detail above.”
SaltySaltillo on Nov 1, 2009 at 17:07:39
“That is just silly. There is no way for a foreign shareholder of a US corporation to get money out of a foreign subsidiary without the money "coming through the USA". The US government collects income tax on a worldwide basis. Consider these two examples:
German investor 1 forms Delaware corporation to own income-producing business assets in France.
German investor 2 forms Cayman Islands company to won income-producing business assets in France.
As the assets in France create revenue that becomes distributable income, the money has to move through either Delaware (for Investor 1) or Cayman Islands (for investor 2) before it can be put into the German investor's pocket as profit.
When the money moves up the chain of ownership through the Delaware corporation, a US tax liability is created.
When the money moves up the chain through the Cayman company, no tax liability in the US or in the Cayman Islands is created because the Cayman Islands - a true tax haven - doesn't collect taxes on companies formed there but not doing business there... the same cannot be said for the Delaware corporation since the US government doesn't care where the Delaware corporation got its money, it is subject to US taxes.
Therefore, Delaware is not an attractive jurisdiction in which for foreigners to engage in tax deferral. The cayman islands is.”
“For foreign individuals and companies, it doesn't matter that the US taxes worldwide income. Say you're a German and incorporate a shell company in Delaware that doesn't have your name attached anywhere. This corporation earns income in Germany. No tax is due in the US until you repatriate the profits to the US, but since you're German, you're *never* going to repatriate the profits and will never have to pay tax. Since your name is not attached to the company, there is no way for German authorities to find and tax you. So you pay no tax anywhere, building up tax liabilities in the US that never have to be paid.
If this German were in Luxembourg, taxes would be withheld and paid to Germany even though your name wouldn't be disclosed (I think that's the current situation); if in Switzerland, tax secrecy is being cracked by the US and the German tax authorities will cite that precedent; if in Liechtenstein, the Germans will bribe a bank official to get your name (which the Germans actually did!).”
richdibo on Nov 1, 2009 at 18:41:39
The abuse that you describe can occur in in any similar scenario - the incorporator (sovereign state or other political subdivision) is not the culprit. A German could choose any state.
Apparently the author concludes that since Delaware is the preferred state of incorporation and sites statistics of it volume, Delaware is a "tax haven" and the principal transgressor in perpetrating this deferral scheme. Generally, incorporators don't disclose shareholder's names when incorporating - just officers. And any requirement to notify states of all new shareholders would be burdensome. I would not attribute the lack of knowledge of the shareholders to "secrecy laws." Try to find out all of the shareholders of the corporation that operates your favorite restaurant.
I am sure that Germany and other taxing jurisdictions have their versions of laws that prevent this abuse by taxing deemed distribution to the shareholder - their Sub-Part F equivalent.”
richdibo on Nov 1, 2009 at 18:41:14
You aptly describe an old problem that faces tax jurisdictions where an individual, corporation or other taxpayer has income in a foreign corporation outside of the jurisdiction of his home country. Tax on this income is deferred until repatriated. During the Kennedy administration, the US legislated a set of rules that allowed the US to tax the US shareholders of these foreign corporations. Under certain circumstances, the profits of these foreign corporations that are not currently repatriated are deeded dividend income to the US shareholders. (Sub Part F, personal foreign holding companies, PFICs)
The concept is clear: a foreign country cannot tax a corporation that is formed in another country on it income that is not earned within its boundaries. But the foreign corporation can tax the citizen or resident shareholder - only if its knows about the situation. US law requires a US shareholder to provide various financial information about foreign corporations in which have at least a 10% ownership interest (Form 5471). The IRS has made it abundantly clear that they are going after these forms and assessing stiff penalties for failure or late filing. ( A paradigm shift from going after waitresses and earned income credit takers - thank you Obama.)”
SaltySaltillo on Nov 1, 2009 at 16:32:35
“You are confused. If a Delaware corporation earns money ANYWHERE ON EARTH, it incurs a tax liability in the United States. There is no way a German shareholder can get money out of the Delaware company without the occurrence of a taxable event in the United States. Repatriation must take place eventually. If the Delaware company conducts business in Germany, there would also be a German income tax liability associated with the activities of that company because foreign companies earning income in Germany are subject to German income taxes. Therefore, I fail to see how any German shareholder of a Delaware corporation doing business in Germany gets any sort of special deal.”
“Well, I don't know much about cooking, but I've eaten barbecue in a number of different places and I believe Memphis sauce for pulled pork is distinctive. I grew up in there and can tell you that pulled pork is more central to barbecue in Memphis than ribs are. In fact, the term "barbecue" is reserved for sandwiches, not ribs, which are just "ribs." I've also never heard anyone call the Rendevous "The Vous," though admittedly I haven't lived there in a while. The Memphis in May World Championship Barbecue Festival is more prestigious, IMO, than some commercial event where you have to include the sponsor's beverage in the sauce.
My own personal favorite is The Bar-B-Q Shop at 1782 Madison Avenue in Midtown. I have been going there since 1983. Its sauce, Dancing Pigs, is available online at www.dancingpigs.com They also sell dry seasoning for dry ribs, and serve excellent wet and dry ribs. But I am more a fan of barbecue than ribs (see above), and they have had consistently great barbecue batch after batch after batch for over 25 years.”
hp blogger Meathead on May 27, 2009 at 12:15:04
“You are right that Memphis in May is one of the biggest and best competitions. The Jack, however, is an invitational, and everyone must have won a state competition to qualify. And it is only the sauce tasting that requires Jack Daniels. All other categories you can use any sauce you want.