Cross posted from RenounceUScitizenship.
Why you ask? It’s simple. With Congressman Ryan on the ticket, tax reform will move to “front and center” of the 2012 Presidential campaign. Congressman Ryan supports territorial taxation. Congress just passed HR 6169 a bill called “Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act of 2012“.
On August 8, 2012 “Just Me” posted the following at the Isaac Brock Society:
One of the last acts of the House before they went on summer recess was to pass HR 6169. It has a snowball’s chance in Hell of passing the Senate as currently configured. It was seen as a partisan political document to campaign on, rather than a realistic attempt at tax reform. That is how the game is viewed in DC by the political wonks, and in fact it is how it plays out in reality. However, since it is “game on” time, I like that this gauntlet was thrown down. The title appeals.
It was called “Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act of 2012″
Here is the text version. It got NO votes from the Dems in the House. So why do I bring it up?
Take a look at Section 2, (B) (5) (F) of the legislative language, and you will see the following language that should be of interest to all here:
(5) makes American workers and businesses more competitive by–
(F) transitioning to a globally competitive territorial tax system;
Here is how the non partisan global publication, Tax News reported it, if you wish to read further. You can Google search for many partisan opinions if you are interested.
Congressman Ryan discusses HR 6169 here:
Representative Ryan discusses Bill HR 6169 (tax reform bill)| U.S. Congressman Paul Ryan paulryan.house.gov/news/documents… – Change to territorial tax!
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) August 12, 2012
This is worth listening to. Mr. Ryan talks about the U.S. in the global economy and the role that taxes play. He actually compares the rate of business tax in the U.S. to the rate in Canada. I do agree that all the discussion of “territorial taxation” is in the context of corporations. But, once the principle is recognized in relation to corporations, it is a smaller step to argue that it should be extended to people, as this comment thread starting here recognizes.
Bottom Line: With Congressman Ryan on the Republican ticket, tax reform will become a very public and prominent campaign issue. This is very good news for U.S. citizens abroad. Speaking of tax reform, see what Dan Mitchell has to say and note that he endorses territorial taxation.
Very important! Dan Mitchell makes the case for territorial taxation – Thanks Dan! danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/a-p…
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) August 12, 2012
Excuse my ignorance, but who exactly originates changes or additions to the IRC? Who does the original draft? How does the process work from the proposal stage to actual inclusion in the IRC. A brief description of the process is fine.
*please don’t believe in false hope. It doesn’t matter what political party gets into the White House. American Expats are so low on their priority list that people like you and my wife are not even on their radar. I don’t believe that the situation will get any better and everything that I’m seeing in the news from south of the border points in that direction.
*Clint: Changes to the tax laws originate in the House of Representatives, so any House member may introduce a bill on taxation. The draft legislation is submitted to the Clerk of the House who records it, assigns it a number and gives it to the speaker of the House for assignment. The idea has become a “bill”.
The speaker of the House refers the tax bill to a committee, usually the House Ways and Means Committee, that will study the bill. The committee will often send the bill to a subcommittee. Committee members vote to determine the recommendations and amendments that should be presented to the House. Finally, the committee prepares a report with the bill’s text, its purpose and scope, proposed amendments with explanations and arguments for adoption. The speaker of the House schedules the bill for debate on the floor. A successful bill becomes a House Act and is sent to the Senate for consideration.
The Senate follows the same basic process, referring most tax bills to the Senate Committee on Finance for study. In addition to other resources, the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation studies tax legislation, assists committees in their deliberations and assists members with analysis. When both House and Senate have passed identical bills, the act is transmitted to the President for his signature to become a law.
Yea, this is good, unless you are a Women, and think you have a right to control your own body!!
If that is your view, then be prepared for his Controlling efforts via Constitutional amendments on your “right to choose.” He represents the religious police, in my opinion! If you don’t mind that sort of stuff, and think that politicians and government should make these decisions for you, then fine, you should be happy with his tax positions.
Personally, I do not like these so called conservatives that speak “Freedom” out of one side of their mouth, and then are quite happy to use their “left side of their mouth” to impose their religious views on society “at large” via some belief they have of “God given or restricted rights”!
Sorry, but I am not sold on this guy even if it possibly benefits Expats, territorial taxation, and he is a supporter of HR 6169. I fear his very Conservative religiosity more than I have hope for his Fair tax policy.
Just my opinion, and sorry that it steps into that very personal religious space. I don’t want to be disrespectful of those who are fervently “Pro-Life”, as that is a argument we will never agree on. I just want to point out where he stands, and you can decide if that represents your view of a governments legitimate role in a woman’s life.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your POV, VP picks have little to no impact on elections. I think that applies here. My opinion, and I could be wrong. 🙂
@Just Me, just so we can minimumize the hyperbole, when you write “think you have a right to control your own body!!” are you referring to an overturn of Roe-v-Wade or are you talking about women losing some of the special goodies like a womans right to free and unlimited birth control? There is a big difference.
I’ll just mention that I am an atheist and I believe in the mother AND THE FATHERS right to choose before I say that Roe-v-Wade is patently unconstitutional. This was never a matter for the federal government to decide.
But RvW is one prime example of how feminists, gays, minorities and environmentalists sold out the country to the socialists in order to progress their agendas. The socialists, basically rich populist liars, would tell any lie and sell out the country for power, which they have achieved.
And your post above illustrates the issue, you place the importance of the minute risk that Romney and Ryan might push to repeal the unconstitutional RvW above the hope that they might seriously reform the tax code. That is your choice, but it is all these single issue voters like you who put Obama into power.
Personally, I think Obama has already been chosen for another term, but I love the spirit of this comment from ZH:
I don’t know, he’s got that same “don’t trust a word that comes out of my mouth” creepy smile that Romney, Obama et al all have. I wouldn’t expect anything remarkable to happen due to his selection if elected.
I’m a man and I didn’t have control over my body until I renounced my citizenship. Before that, a far away government in a land bordering where I live, thought that it could continue to control my body by forcing me to pay taxes on the money that I earn in the body. I guess because there’s this tattoo that says my ass belongs to the United States of America. Last I checked that country was run by the democrat party.
Thank you. Just to clarify, who exactly writes the draft for the Congressperson who will then submit it to the House?
I left my U.S. civics knowledge at the border when I moved to Canada more than 3 decades ago.
@ Just me
I couldn’t agree with you more.
Pun-prone brain circuits perceive potential connections partout:
Was it an infection from that tattoo on the rump that made you “cheeky”?
Odds that a VP might become a president?:
…”What are the chances a vice-president will someday become president?
one in three. That’s based on the first 43 vice-presidents, since the
men who held that office after George H. W. Bush moved into the oval
office in 1989 could still become president.
Four vice-presidents inherited the office after the president died due to natural causes.”……
The business community does support Ryan while main street (left leaning) does not. I got a snap shot of polls
upper from Yahoo finance
lower from CNN
Upper from Yahoo Finance
Lower from CNN
I almost thought better of hitting enter on that one late last night. Maybe I should have slept on it. LOL
I am speaking to the right of a women (and her partner) to make a decision related to an unwanted pregnancy without government imposition. For instance, I do not support mandated vaginal ultrasound requirements that many of the “freedom” Conservatives are trying to get passed into law at the State level.
This is basically in the same realm as I do not think it is Governments role to control what you ingest, via the War on Drugs, whose unintended consequences and cost far out weight the moral imperative of those idealist who think that these criminal restrictions is a proper role of government. Prohibition was a prime example of what didn’t work, but we can’t seem to learn those lessons when it comes to drugs. The fear and criminalization of drug use rises out of our religious cultural history, and the Puritanical need to tell people what they can and can not do with their bodies.
You seem to think I am a single issue voter, but I don’t think I am. I am pragmatic enough to realize there is no perfect choice, and even with this issue, I will still have to try to balance the “good vs bad” aspects of the two poor choices we have. Maybe, I will just vote for the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, even though he hasn’t a snowballs chance in Hell in going anywhere.
I make that choice, as I do find myself very much leaning Libertarian, and may be the way I vote in the up coming election. Might as well, as in Washington State, Obama will get the electoral votes anyway. So, I might vote this way, even though I doubt that Libertarian idealism can exist in the real world.
Humans, by evolutionary nature, it seems to me, have tendencies towards to control or manipulation of other members of their species. That gets demonstrated in many of societies practices, from religious conversion that doesn’t allow for infidels, to tribal grouping where a leader makes the determinations for the group, to Dictatorships with their obvious faults and failures, and Majority rule Democracy without regard to the rights or protections of an minority.
We, as humans, just can not seem to ‘live and let live’ as Libertarianism envisions. We want to convert, and if we can not do it voluntarily through persuasion, there is something in our nature that makes some (not all) decide that they have to do it forcefully. If someone could explain to me how Libertarianism would deal with that human tendency, then I stand ready to be educated.
Anyway, thanks for asking the question…
A question back to you, does Swiss health care provide for birth control “goodies” coverage too? I am wondering how correct this presentation by Frontline was on the Swiss system of mandated coverage in “Sick around the world” It says there was a basic universal coverage plan, and just wondered how basic it was.
Speaking birth control — it reminds me China when I was a teenager. We had really tight birth control policy (as one child per family — and the government set the age when women could bear a child –something like 27-28). All birth control pills and condoms were free at any drug store.
As teenagers, we would not be able to get them –so we had to lie “that is for my father/mother/grandpa/grandma etc).
Not that we needed condoms for sex (as we would be punished to be sent a reform school), we used condoms to make water bombs -:)
Thanks for a reminder of other’s experiences, POVs and water bomb creation tools! 🙂
I was just listening to C-SPAN radio in my car on my way home, and Grover Norquist was talking about tax reform. He criticized worldwide taxation of INDIVIDUALS. He didn’t say anything about FATCA/FBAR/OVDI, but he focused on the economic aspects, saying that citizenship-based taxation hurts exports, and that Americans have a disadvantage over citizens of European countries like Germany, for being hired in countries with lower tax rates like Saudi Arabia and Brazil (just like Roger Conklin says). He also gave the example of French citizens who are not taxed by France if they move to the US, but Americans are still taxed by both countries if they move to France. He then continued on territorial taxation for corporations.
I think this is huge. I had never heard anyone in the US talk about the issue, and Norquist is influential among Republicans in Congress. Maybe the tax reform plan will really include territorial or residential taxation for individuals.
Do you know what NPR program that interview was on? I am trying to find it…
This interview was from August 11th, All Things Considered, but haven’t yet found the story you heard on the Radio today. Might it have been on some program that is not broadcast nationally…
and unrelated… for Canadians… I can vouch for this one. It is stunning the number of Canadians that come across the border. You should see the line for gas with all the fuel containers they bring with them. 🙂
As for Americans complaining… tough! They are good customers!
@Just Me, Sorry, it was C-SPAN radio, not NPR (I corrected my post). I found a video of the program here: http://www.c-span.org/Events/Grover-Norquist-Discusses-Role-of-Taxes-in-National-Security/10737433053-1/. The discussion about Americans abroad starts at 13:15.
He doesn’t make the distinction between citizenship and residence taxation, only between worldwide and territorial. That is not really correct as most countries do tax the foreign income of those who reside there. It seems to me that he doesn’t really understand the subject, or he was trying to simplify it. But the general idea is right, and I’m glad that finally someone “important” is talking about it.
@Shadow Raider. I will watch that tonight. Appreciate it.
Understanding the Ryan plan
By Matt Miller, Published: August 12
The looming presidential election will not bring any change for the better in the USA. I don’t have a vote but here’s my take on things anyway …
Economy tanks faster
Hegemony spreads vaster
Obama the lie masker
And Romney the gaffe master
Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Either dude’s a disaster
Lady Hope will only arrive if Anger and Courage walk with her and Truth shows her the way.
But JFK said it much better: “The government that makes evolution impossible makes revolution inevitable.”
@Just Me, if you had written that Romney/Ryan would crack down on the “war against drugs” instead of womens “rights” (either a right applies to everyone or no one) you would have had me applauding you. What a miserable failure Obama the one time pot head and coke dealer has been on the “war against drugs”, it really shows how he is owned.
My daughter had an acne problem in her teens. My mother and siblings kept telling us that “no kid in the US suffers from acne any more”. My wife took our daughter to a couple of specialists and nothing seemed to work. It turns out most of the acne medication in the states is just antibiotics and apparently many of the teens in the US are permanently taking them. The Swiss just don’t do this so the Swiss doctors put her on birth control pills instead. I remember she tried 2 different kinds, the normal ones and the expensive ones. neither one really worked, her body just had to grow up. Knowledge of these expensive birth control pills is one of the things that pissed me off with the Fluke media circus.
In Switzerland there is a minimum health insurance that people are required to carry. What all the mandates are for the minimum package depends on the Canton. Some may cover birth control. We have extra insurance to cover us when we are traveling (covers any doctor and any hospital) which is quite expensive. In order to mitigate these costs we have very high deductible, 2000CHF. We have rarely received any coverage from our insurance company over the years, we always end up paying out of pocket. As I recall we paid for both sets of birth control pills.
What are “vaginal ultrasound requirements”?
Here is what Conservatives have tried to pass in various states…
You can google others. In Virginia, the governor backed down…
From your description of Swiss mandated coverage, the Frontline story had it right.
@Just Me, WP article by Matt Miller is misleading, although the half of it is true.
The fact of the matter is that the United States is insolvent. It has one of two choices: continue to do Federal Reserve tricks which essentially increases the money supply and monetizes the insolvency. Or cut current expenditures by 45%. Either way, there will be rioting in the streets–just the QE solution kicks the can down the road, and makes the dollar worthless. The second solution would mean that the US keeps its dollar as the world’s reserve currency but must cut back and people live on a fraction of what they do now.
Pick your poison. But when you spend like a bat at of hell during the good times it greatly reduces your options during a crisis.
This presidential race is a choice between Obama who will spend the United States into hyperinflation of the US dollar; or Romney who will spend the United States into hyperinflation of the US dollar. You can put different ornaments on a Christmas tree, but it is still a tree. The difference between Romney and Obama is ornamental at this point.