France is all a’flutter over the news that the beloved actor Gérard Depardieu was seeking (and apparently has now obtained) a second passport.
“Je suis un citoyen du monde,” he has declared and that is the reason he is giving for accepting a Russian passport. He vigorously denies that his actions are linked to tax matters in France though few people believe him since he has been highly critical of the French government’s tax policies and not too long ago he left the Hexagon for Belgium which provoked a perfect storm of criticism and angst. Look here for a superb editorial about the language that French politicians have been using to describe him (tax evader, ingrate, deserter – terms that many of us here hear quite often). The conclusion of the author of the piece? These politicians are unconscious defenders of slavery, says Bertrand Lemennicier, who act ” s’ils étaient propriétaires de nos corps et de nos vies.” (as if they owned our bodies and our lives.)
And Depardieu was having none of it. His open letter to the President and Prime Minister is something to read and I invite you to do so. He certainly came out swinging and was not in the slightest bit apologetic – apoplectic is more like it. A few choice bits that I enjoyed greatly:
“Je n’ai pas à justifier les raisons de mon choix, qui sont nombreuses et intimes.” (I do not have justify the reasons for my choices which are many and private.)
“Je n’ai jamais tué personne, je ne pense pas avoir démérité, j’ai payé 145 millions d’euros d’impôts en quarante-cinq ans, je fais travailler 80 personnes dans des entreprises qui ont été créées pour eux et qui sont gérées par eux.” (I never killed anyone, I don’t think I was ever a bad guy, I paid 145 million Euros in taxes over 45 years, I provide work for 80 people in companies that were created for and are managed by them.)
And he ends his missive by asking the French President and his Prime Minister, “Who in the hell are you to judge me?”
Good question and I applaud him for having the courage and the audacity to ask it. As Depardieu so rightly points out those who leave their countries of origin – who choose to live, marry, raise families and work on distant shores- should never have to justify their choices to anyone. We have that right – the right to leave the place where we accidentally found ourselves at one point in time and to go wherever we are welcome. This is true of all of us whatever category of migrant we happen to be in – whether we are film stars or farmhands. And the only proper response in my view to attempts by states and their homeland citizens to prevent people from leaving their territories (policies against emigration) or punishing them for it (exit taxes and citizenship-based taxation) or trying to shame them into staying is outrage.
OUTRAGE, absolutely!
Thanks for translating those lines-I think he makes excellent points. I especially love the simple ones – “I never killed anyone, I don’t think I was ever a bad guy.” How obvious, eh?
And I would think anybody could understand, there is a limit to everything and 75% is an unbelievable amount to ask of anyone. There comes a time when standing up to what is not right and not fair, is necessary. Preaching to the choir here but he should not have to justify his actions, period.
Hope you’re feeling better and that all this mess, is at least manageable.
Note that the public will gladly chastise any French minnow, but the public only listens to the one star who stands up. Sweden\s Astrid Lindgren (creator of Pippi Longstocking) did the same when she was taxed 102% of her income–and it finally created the needed change.
@nobledreamer – Depardieu is one of my favorite actors and now I have another reason to admire him. Talk about going out like a lion. Nothing timid about his response and I love his language. Really well done and the next time I hear similar asinine comments I think I will try to channel my inner Depardieu and get testy. As you said, enough is enough and some of the language he was responding to from the government was really over the top. Is it really “minable” (translated as “shabby” in English but that doesn’t capture the true sense of the word which is very strong) – “shitty” I think is better) to not want to be fleeced?
Feeling better? Oh yeah! Thanks and bises. 🙂
@mark twain – You’re right but it says something very interesting about France. You will notice that the public has no issue with taxing those “evil capitalists” at 75% but in France creative people (artists, actors, writers and the like) are not considered by the general public to be in that category. Depardieu has something they want, something they are proud of and something they want to keep around. Call it “cultural capital” that contributes to spreading the light of France around the world. And they can tax him all they like but they can never take his talent from him or levy an exit tax against it. Something to think about.
@Victoria
Good to see you moved, feeling better and blogging again.
Thanks for weighing on on Depardieu and doing the translations for us. I of course am aware of his story, and headlines on the internet, but your blog post really helps me better focus on who he is and what he has been saying. Wished a few Financial Institutions would take some inspiration and tell the US. some similar strong language about FATCA.
Yes, you are right, we are not obliged to justify our choices, when we decide to leave our countries of origin. BUT: Isn’t it too easy and too cowardly? You can be running and escaping whole life long or you can face the problems, fight them and try to win. I don’t judge Mr. Depardieu, neither do I say that he had no right to do it. But being a famous actor with an opinion that matters and praising Russia, and especially president Putin, for their democracy is a very poor joke. I really doubt his intelligence.
An instant passport and Russian citizenship. While the rest of us have to slog it out years in other countries to even apply for citizenship. I guess that’s what rich and famous does for ya.
@LorneMarr: Isn’t it too easy and too cowardly? You can be running and escaping whole life long or you can face the problems, fight them and try to win.
Unequal outcomes. Fighting, and in particular fighting “city hall”, fails more often than it succeeds, with an added possibility of catastrophe on losing. Flight, on the other hand, offers certainty of an acceptable and sufficient upside for moderate or even non-existent downside.
From the war of words that preceded this move one could conclude that Mr Depardieu has in effect already fought, and lost. Why hang around to be further beaten up?
Lots of Depardiues are already gone from USA. Why fight a fight that won’t be won?
@LorneMarr, Russia’s democracy is a poor joke? France that bastion of freedom. Let me tell you a story. I landed in France and flights from Toronto with Air France land in the early morning. My friend Patty picked me up and then embarrassingly asked me if we could go shopping at Ikea. She waits all years on her purchases because government regulated retails sales only happen once a year. So that particular month or week was when she tried to do all her Ikea shopping. So retailers are regulated to the point where the state tells them when they can put their merchandise on sale.
Then, there was a survey in France a couple years ago in which 75% of people said that their ideal career was a government job. Even further back, my good French friend got very mad at me when I scoffed at his notion of “guaranteed income” for everyone, no matter what they did or whether they worked or not.
Then in France, tens of thousands of cars are burnt on the streets every year. It exposes the broken glass fallacy because despite the number of cars destroyed every year, new car sales have plummeted.
In the United States, the authorities now can steal (called “civil forfeiture”), lock up citizens under the suspicion of terrorism without habeas corpus rights, or even assassinate a citizen. Police may even take to beating civilians and don’t have to afterwards face any charges. Operatives close to the government may steal and not have to face indictment: all they have to do is say, “I don’t know how the clients’ segregated funds were lost in my proprietary trading bets that went South.” (a la John Corzine). Banksters now regularly rip off the retired by keeping interest rates artificially at zero percent, and then lending the money to other banksters who then lend the funds to the United States Treasury so that the politicians can continue their profligate deficit spending at over a trillion dollars per year, thus ripping off every foreign holder of United States currency. That includes Russia and China, the places where people are starting to return because these countries have restored some semblance of tax freedom compared to what you find in the West.
And here in Canada? We pay our taxes well into June (Tax Freedom Day). That’s right. We pay almost half the year in taxes as slaves of the state and then our municipal, provincial and federal governments say, “ok, you can start earning money to pay your bills now.”
I don’t know what country you live in but I think that it might be good to get off your high horse. Depardieu has the right to go to Russia if that’s where he thinks he can best find happiness. I don’t know if he is right. But it is not less attractive to me than the United States at this point, and that, unfortunately is a sign of the degradation of the USA. At one time, I could proudly say that people voted with their feet to move to the United States. Now, Depardieu is going to Russia. But he is just the first of many. You should consider the work of Doug Casey:
True freedom seekers are looking for where they and their capital are welcome and not persecuted by socialists who think that everything you make belongs to the State and the State allows you a certain percentage for your own needs and wants. Depardieu says, well actually, what I earn belongs to me and I can take myself and my capital anywhere in the world that pleases me. It is not yours to squander.
I get really tired of hearing the accusation of “cowardly”–I’ve been accused several times of being cowardly. Why not say that the people at home on food stamps and welfare cheques who are afraid to step out of the door of their government subsidized houses: Aren’t they lazy and cowardly and greedy to boot? Won’t they vote for the person who promises to continue the payments? My cats depend on me. They never probably venture much more than a mile from home. It seems those who depend on the state probably would never move to a place like Russia. Why should they? Their free meals are in the United States (France, etc.), close to home.
Cowardly? Staying and fighting?
During the recent US election, I pointed out repeatedly to my US friends bent on Obama that he has broken more promises than he’s kept and that his foreign policy is little different. and often an extension of the Bush years. and that he is totally in favor of the continued police state. But they thought that this time would be different than last – and “he gave us health care”. Now those same people are beginning to complain (much as they did in 2009) that Obama is caving. What a surprise. It’s who the guy is. His new cabinet picks are scarier than his last and he’s already on the path to compromising away the safety nets that ppl elected him to save as they are. He’s as bought and paid for as anyone is Washington DC.
Politicians are the same the world over to varying degrees. So it really comes down to – where on the planet does the culture and structure of govt line up best with your values and needs.
Fighting “city hall” as another points out is often pointless. You expend and expend and nothing changes b/c when politics reaches a certain level – it’s not about the average person at all aside from collecting tax money from them or paying it out to them to keep them compliant.
Is Russia a better or worse place than France or the US? It would depend, I think, on who you are and what your circumstances are.
When I left the US, I didn’t give much thought to whether or not I would ever return but the longer I am away, the less appealing return is and as it isn’t where my life is anymore and the decision to relinquish my US citizenship becomes less difficult by the day.
People are lucky that there are still options for emigration. I can easily envision the day when that might not be the case for anyone – even the rich and famous.
@Lornemarr – Cowards? I suppose that is one way to look at it. Or we could use the language of the French politicians that went after Depardieu (or the American ones who went after Saverin) and call these folks ingrates and traitors.
But here is the thing. The US and France were and are countries of immigration. Their populations are filled with people (or their descendants) who left their countries of origin for any number of reasons some of which were (if we are honest) purely financial: they wanted a better life, to make money, to get rich. These people were not archangels just as people are not saints today. Were the immigrants of today and yesterday cowards? Should they have stayed where they were born and fought to make their countries better places? When they got on that plane, train or ship were they taking the easy way out?
That kind of depends on where you sit, doesn’t it? Every immigrant is an emigrant. It’s still the same person – only the perspective changes. I think I see what you are trying to say but I would still argue that if we are going to call Depardieu and those like him “cowards” for leaving home then most of the people living in North America and many other places are the descendants of people who were just as “cowardly” (or venal or traitorous or any other pejorative term you care to use). From the perspective of the original homelands of these folks they probably were. (I sincerely doubt that the family of my Germany ancestors applauded when they packed up and moved to Missouri, USA).
I have a different view. I think people have been moving around trying to better their lives for themselves and their families for as long as human beings have been on the planet. That is I think normal human behaviour and I don’t think it can or should be stopped and I refuse to make a distinction between categories of migrants based on their reasons (good versus bad) for leaving one country for another.
Just my .02.
no worries. I have been fighting for 8 months with zero result. More importantly, 90% of my savings is now out of the USA.
@LorneMarr,
RE:
I don’t know what country you’re from, but if you’re from the US (or Canada), I would guess some of your ancestors left their country of origin.
I am a coward……. With the right to pursue Life, Liberty and happiness. Whoopeeee!
As we move around the globe, the Total Information Awareness regime is slowly but surely being put together…. GATCA is but one part of it. I wonder, if at some point in the future, there literally will not be a place to run and hide.
iSpy vs. gSpy
Privacy from government intrusion maybe a thing of the past, in a not too distant a future. This story ends with a question?
Given the exponential change in technology, and now quickly these trend accelerate, it maybe sooner than we think.
GATCA may be just one of many GOTCHAs of the future.
Putin’s Tax Ploy: Give Us Your Wealthy, Your Actors, Your Fed-up
So, is Putin also thinking about telling America to take their FATCA and stuffit?
The French government would rather have 75% of nothing.
Dear all,
first of all, I don’t get why so many of you are so edgy. Is it because the word “cowardly”?
Let’s get to your replies:
@Watcher: From the war of words that preceded this move one could conclude that Mr Depardieu has in effect already fought, and lost.
Seriously? War of words? It is great ideas that has always mattered. But every great idea has to be transformed into deeds, not into words, because they don’t mean almost anything.
@Mark Twain: Why fight a fight that won’t be won?
An answer to this question would cover pages and pages of a philosophy paper. Many people decide not to fight when the circumstances are indicating that they will/may lose. Those who fight despite of it hope to be followed by other individuals, in case they don’t manage to win.
@Petros: Well, I actually can’t reply to a particular part of your comment; you obviously misunderstood me. I was speaking about morality not about money. I mentioned Russia as an example of country where freedom is just an illusion. The same goes for many other countries in the world including the U.S. (I’m not a naive teen). The point is that he stressed the Russian democracy. And that’s so ridiculous as if I were to praise the U.S. for the same. He could have mentioned dozens of other reasons why he had decided to get a Russian passport when. Instead of it, he said this nonsense. And one more thing:
@Petros:
True freedom seekers are looking for where they and their capital are welcome and not persecuted by socialists who think that everything you make belongs to the State and the State allows you a certain percentage for your own needs and wants. Depardieu says, well actually, what I earn belongs to me and I can take myself and my capital anywhere in the world that pleases me. It is not yours to squander.
True freedom seekers’ capital is inside them, in their minds, not on their bank accounts. I am by no means a socialist, but I am reasonable enough to understand that the world cannot do without certain laws, order, and leaders. Even if it has many flaws and the leaders are far from perfect. Therefore, not everything you earn belongs to you. Without this organism called state you would never have the chance to earn the money and your neighbours would eat you alive, because it’s in our nature. That’s the reason why a certain degree of control is necessary. And if anarchists should sometime in the future have their own model of society, I would put them in the first row to enjoy the show.
@a
Pretty much the same I mentioned before. You’re right, it’s the same all over the globe, only the degree varies. As for Obama I agree with you too. @ I can easily envision the day when that might not be the case for anyone – even the rich and famous. :: This day will surely come and we should start thinking about some alternatives. Maybe replacing the old greedy politicians by younger ones. (there are still some people out there who are talented and skilled enough and would be grateful for such opportunity.
@Victoria: Were the immigrants of today and yesterday cowards? Should they have stayed where they were born and fought to make their countries better places? When they got on that plane, train or ship were they taking the easy way out?
1. Yes, they were. 2. Yes, they should. 3. Yes, they were. 4. Not those people, but those politicians are traitors, but the people, and especially those who are popular in the society, should do their best to initiate a change. 5. you can replace the word cowardly by choosing the easier way
@ pacifica777: I don’t know what country you’re from, but if you’re from the US (or Canada), I would guess some of your ancestors left their country of origin.
You’re right, they did and I’m not proud of it.
@LorneMarr,
Fair enough … different opinions.
But, I’m just musing here — what if a couple falls in love, wants to marry (presumably live in the same place) but come from two countries? Someone has to move.
Or what if a person just likes the lifestyle better in another country than the one they were born in? No political reasons to change countries, no financial reasons to change country (though I consider both valid reasons). But sort of like moving fromAlberta to Nova Scotia – or Maine to California .
In any event, political, financial, marriage or lifestyle, I don’t see changing countries as particularly easy (or hard) or cowardly (or brave).
Lorne wrote: “Is it because the word “cowardly”?” Um, yeah.
See: http://righteousinvestor.com/2011/12/04/dialogue-with-brave-jim_in_houston/
BTW, I do understand the concept of protection money, you know where you have to pay the guy with the toughest thugs on his side to protect you from the other tough guys out there. The world is not what it used to be since now governments and corporations are the biggest most powerful thieves:
@LorneMarr, A clear and honest answer. Thank you for the reply. I can’t help but think that the native peoples of North and South America would have been much better off if your (and my) ancestors had indeed stayed home. And today instead of sitting here in Europe with a carte de resident, I would be a full citizen instead. (I always suspected that I belonged over here and not over there 🙂
Thank you Mr. LoneMarr,
I guess this means you will not only be signing the petition but also forwarding it to your network
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/change-us-tax-law-citizenship-based-law-residence-based-law/b6v4xfpV
I see that you have more substance than a simple petition, and have a good network which can persuade the Ways and Means committee to eliminate US taxation of US persons outside of USA borders. It takes a bit more formulation to put that into Words and also takes a lot more effort to get your Word Heard. Thank you for your Active interest: Here, you can input a full document with the suggestions. Please also work with your Senators and Representatives to support your inputs. You will need to visit them personally in order to get your Word across. You will also need to work with your full network in order to get them to begin to consider what you are saying. Perhaps contributions might be the only way for you to actually be heard
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/taxreform/
@LorneMarr,
So, you are willing to deny the force of nature which is the immigration of man since the day he crawled out of the trees, or went with Moses when he parted the red sea to leave Egypt? Were they cowards? I guess you think they were. They should have staid and fought the Pharaohs.
Man has been always moving to better his plight, for whatever the reasons whether you or I agree with them or not. To do so is not cowardly, it is what created America and innovative cultures based upon migration. It also created the suffering of the American Indians at the hands of the settlers. The Indians were fleeing something too, cowardly so, when they first crossed the Russian/Alaska land bridge to come to the Americas and moved to the Southwest. They were cowards afraid of the glaciers I guess, and should have stayed to fight.
It is when folks stop moving, and become static unable to take steps to change their plight through movement or, “stay to fight” as you say, when the real problems of begin. By your arguments, no one should ever move from California to Nevada. They should stay to fight! Or maybe never move out of the ghetto, but should stay to fight? At what level are you willing to allow a person movement without calling them cowards?
Appreciate that you have a different view, but I think @Victoria has the better argument.
@ pacifica777
First of all, it was aimed at economic migrants. And I don’t consider it easy, just easier. Love or lifestyle is something different. And political reasons? All countries are decaying from within, their very core is rotten and those which don’t just have more skilled politicians (in terms of hiding it well). That’s what I regard as a reason to fight, instead of packing it up and leaving. Because it seems that this is just a beginning and the EU is going to become a huge cage for all those countries inside.
@ Petros
alright then, let’s make it “choosing the easier way”, if that’s okay with you. just briefly(and generalized): I’ve always said that you have to work, if you want to earn money. If you have two hands and a head on your neck, there’s no reason why you should wait till something drops into your palms. This socialist movement that is so popular in the EU is ridiculous, and so are their principles. People should not act as callous bastards not giving a damn about how others live, but the generous socialists, on the other hand, certainly would not be happy, if they were to pay immense amounts of money just because of their success.
P.S. I’m going to answer the other comments later.
@LorneMarr:
Prof. von Koppenfels of Kent University studies migration and has researched American emigrants. Attached is an overview of this research. The bullet points on p. 3 help to answer the question “Why do Americans leave the United States?” and might be informative:
http://bsmlegal.com/PDFs/vonKoppenfels.pdf