> <i>What's more, various other tax regimes that have been enacted to prevent tax dodges by the rich, and those too could be at risk, according to Callas.</i><p>Good. The US has the most draconian and ridiculous laws for expats in the world. The 10 million Americans living abroad could use some relief. The minute you leave the country you're treated as a "rich tax dodger" (as this clearly naive author suggests) when this is not the case for 99.999% of expats.<p>In the past 15 years its become impossible to open a bank account abroad, invest money abroad, or even conduct business activity from abroad due to these laws. The US is the only country in the world that taxes its citizens and green card holders for life after they leave (there's one other tiny country in Africa that tries but doesn't have the power). Its time to finally get with the rest of the world on this.
I’d like the Supreme Court to take up the topic of whether US taxes should be levied on Americans no matter where they live (citizenship based) rather than like every other country in the world (other than Eritrea) - based on residency.
You should only be taxed on income that you actually receive. Matt Levine did an excellent write up of this, but it makes sense. If you don't actually receive the money to do anything with it you should not be taxed on it.<p><a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-12-04/whose-income-do-you-pay-taxes-on" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-12-04/whose-...</a>
What we're witnessing now is the culmination of the 50+ year Republican Project to hijack government and the judiciary to bring about:<p>1. Destruction of the administrative state. This is why we're seeing so many cases (and rulings) that limit the power of agencies and the rights of people. This is the deregulation component of neoliberalism. Make no mistake, the only reason for this is to transfer wealth to the already insanely rich; and<p>2. Cutting taxes and "entitlements". Again, this is just neoliberalism: to transfer wealth to the already insanely rich. But it also creates a debt-laden (and thus compliant) work force. After all, if you're living paycheck-to-paycheck, you're showing up to work and you're certainly not risking that job by unionizing.<p>Once you realize this, you can see through the politics for what it is. For example, the Republican-led House recently proposed funding the Israel military and now, suddenly caring that we're spending too much, wants to fund it by cutting funding to the IRS [1].<p>This is ridiculous for two reasons.<p>First, every $1 spent on the IRS produces >$1 of tax revenue [2].<p>Second, of the $33 trillion in debt the US government has accumulated in over 2 centuries, nearly a quarter of that came from the 4 years of the Trump presidency [3], mostly from tax cuts to the ultra-wealthy.<p>Again, all of this is simply wealthy transfer to the ultra-wealthy.<p>[1]: <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-house-republicans-unveil-bill-fund-israel-by-cutting-irs-budget-2023-10-30/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-house-republicans-unveil...</a><p>[2]: <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/11/09/irs-uses-funding-to-audit-wealthy/71486513007/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/11/09/irs-uses-fun...</a><p>[3]: <a href="https://wisconsinwatch.org/2023/07/did-the-us-debt-increase-by-7-8-trillion-during-donald-trumps-presidency/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://wisconsinwatch.org/2023/07/did-the-us-debt-increase-...</a>
Is there another publication covering this case? NPR, whose funding comes directly from federal taxes, has an inherent conflict of interest in this case, and based on the slant of the article, they are doing little to mitigate it.
The federal gov is way too big, spends way too much money, and delivers very little for its enormous budget.<p>I’m not saying we shouldn’t do some of the programs, I’m saying the federal government is the wrong/worst place to do it.<p>I say smash that tax code.