Renouncing citizenship: Did Eduardo Saverin do anything wrong?

I don't think he did anything wrong... but, personally, as an immigrant in the United States it's tough to swallow.<p>I'm currently in H-1B status and work for a top tier hedge fund. I recently resigned because I decided it was time to go full on with my own company, and even though I have lived here for 2 years, paid my share of taxes, and have enough saved up to support myself for at least 1.5 to 2 years, if I don't succeed/raise money to sponsor my own H1B in the next few months (or take a new job) there's a chance I will have to go home.<p>Oh, and even getting a chance at getting those few months, is dependent on the USCIS approving my change in status from a specialist worker to a "tourist."<p>There's just so little room for error as an immigrant, but the fact that you can make lots of mistakes is one of the things that makes the US so awesome for gutsy Americans.<p>Immigration is a messed up thing and it's just sad to see someone throw a citizenship away that so many people would fight like crazy for. I doubt he would have gotten that first chance to make it big anywhere else.

I wonder what Eduardo could have done wrong. He came to the US as a wealthy man, paid for the education, invested his money into stock trading then invested his proceeds into some flimsy venture written in PHP and created thousands of jobs and billions of wealth for risky investors. Now he's heading for the exit and going to buy an exit ticket worth half a billion dollars. Instead of creating some obscure umbrella corporation in some shady overseas jurisdiction, "sell" his shares to it and do not pay a dime. And now they call him having no respect and appreciation for his foster country. I'll never manage to understand these commies.

By my math, Eduardo Saverin doesn’t avoid any tax at all by leaving the US, regardless of whether or not his stock goes up or down. If he leaves, the US takes 15% of his stock now. If he stays, the US takes 15% of his stock later. But either way, the US have taken away 15% of his ability to spend.<p>Let’s work through it with numbers, in case that isn’t clear. Say Saverin has $100 worth of Facebook stock. He renounces US citizenship. He sells enough stock to pay $15 to the government, leaving him with $85 in Facebook stock. Over the next year, Facebook doubles in value, leaving him with $170 in stock. He cashes out, and there’s no tax, so he ends up with $170 in cash.<p>Now imagine he stays in the US. He has $100 in Facebook stock, which he pays no tax on because there is no taxable event. Facebook doubles in value over the next year, so he ends up with $200 in stock. Then he cashes out, paying 15% in capital gains, leaving him with $170 cash.<p>Clearly he ends up with the same amount of cash either way. Perhaps Saverin is avoiding tax by leaving the US, but neither this article nor any other article I have read identifies how he is doing so.

Thomas Jefferson:<p>"Our ancestors... possessed a right, which nature has given to all men, of departing from the country in which chance, not choice, has placed them, of going in quest of new habitations, and of there establishing new societies, under such laws and regulations as, to them, shall seem most likely to promote public happiness"

It seems people have missed the article where Eduardo explains why he renounced his citizenship:-<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3972209" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3972209</a>

As long as he didn't broken any law, and he didn't regret what he did, why someone would say he did anything wrong?<p>You may think, he earn his money in the US soil and he should contribute back to the US people. Morally correct. However, if that means he have to fund the US government by paying tax and portion of that money eventually used for launching a war in the middle east, I also think legally avoiding tax to the government is morally correct.

There are only two countries in the world that tax non-residents: America and Eritrea.<p><a href="http://renunciationguide.com/Citizenship-Based-Taxation-International-Comparison.html" rel="nofollow">http://renunciationguide.com/Citizenship-Based-Taxation-Inte...</a><p>As there is no representative for American citizens abroad (they can vote in Federal elections, but the district is based on place of last residence), this is essentially taxation without representation.<p>Saverin has lived in Singapore since 2009. He renounced his citizenship in 2011. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Saverin" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Saverin</a><p>Given the situation, I don't see why he would keep American citizenship.

The big idea here is that no other country in the world handles taxes in this way. As far as I'm aware, no other country is as aggressive as the US in taxing income earned by it's citizens while working overseas.

Saverin's exit is a warning sign, a symptom of a growing sickness in America. All of the envious, hateful attacks on the "top 1%" and the likely prospect of punitive new taxes to support our out-of-control entitlement state make entrepreneurs like Saverin a target, and he knows it.

If American infrastructure invented Facebook then American infrastructure would have invented Facebook.

I'm an immigrant myself and I owe everything I have to USA! There is almost no other country in the world, where an immigrant can make as much impact as a native person can.<p>For this opportunity we should give back as much as we can.

Legally or morally? Legally, I'm not a lawyer but I would guess not. Morally, he has to live with the decision he made oh and legally too since renouncing US citizenship is permanent (as far as I can understand the government site I read).

Of course not.<p>And I don't want to hear complaints from people who haven't paid at least 500 million in taxes.<p>He has done much more for the us than has most people on welfare. They certainly haven't paid their fair share.

I'm not saying he did anything wrong, but it is a bit of a slap in the face. I think the US should have a policy of not admitting renouncers to the country under any status.

Fuck'em. It was a dick move given all the opportunities he got in this country. I prefer rich people more like this: <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/30/stephen-king-tax-me-for-f-s-sake.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/30/stephen-kin...</a>

Ethically, yes. Legally, no.

Objectively, he didn't do anything illegal. He just wants a bigger chunk of his cash. The problem people have is that the cash is going to a "1%"er, instead of lining the pockets of career politicians in Washingon, er, I mean paying for the health care of the poor.