7 thoughts on “Obama-allied CNBC praises Canadian TFSA’s – too bad they’re unavailable to US Persons in Canada”
What does ‘allied’ mean. CNBC is quite hostile to Obama apart from what comes out of Andrew Ross Sorkin.
I watched this segment yesterday. Said very little except to say that the Roth etc was not very flexible. It’s the flexibility of foreign accounts that makes then not ‘primarily used for retirement’ and hence subject to terrible taxation after losing protection from the tax treaties.
@Neill
What do you mean? Al Sharpton, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Matthews are all HUGE Obama supporters.
@Tim.
Maybe so but they all have programs on MSNBC which is quite different from CNBC.
CNBC is a business station following the markets. Investors don’t like Obama and hence for the most part CNBC is hostile to him as well.
@Tim,
To get your head straight see the Santelli exchange that started the Tea Party.
I am having to deal with the PFIC rules to decide whether the pain and suffering of owning a non US mutual fund is worth it – talk about absolute stupidity in rule making. Regarding CNBC, in many instances, they are anti Obama/anti FATCA and anti CBT. I just think of Dumb and Dumber when I think of Obama and his absurd policies. I can only hope the mid term elections change the control of the Senate and keep Republican control of the House.
@Steve,
It is not worth it. The tax rates will be too high. The longer you hold a PFIC as a US person the worse it gets. The reason for this is that sec 1291 (the PFIC rules) assume that all your gains are divided proportionally into all the years you owned the fund. So less and less of your growth gets attributed to the current year (and so subject only to income tax rates) and instead to a PFIC year with the associated interest (sec 1291 interest).
Of course your growth is geometric. We expect % growth in funds over time not linear from initial investment.
You must file form 8621 / tax lot. For dividends you must file it per tax lot / dividend. So it quickly becomes unmaintainable if you reinvest dividends.
Rick Santelli is right and makes a great comment in the CNBC piece. US Congress’ main concern is to maximize their power… Which they do by picking winners and losers. A complex tax code breeds more and more corruption… Both major political parties could achieve most of what they claim to want from an ideological perspective if they simplified the tax code and promoted this kind of savings by ordinary Americans. But in reality the two parties don’t want such a thing, as it reduces their power. (Congress’ reaction to the Burger King/Tim Hortons inversion is yet another example of how they view things completely from the viewpoint of maximizing control…)
Canada is now clearly better by both “liberal” standards and “economically conservative” standards. Canadians pay approximately the same percentage of taxes as Americans (according to the latest KPMG study), have a higher after tax salary, and receive better government services. I don’t think the average American realizes exactly how much he is being duped. While corruption has always been present, of course, I think it has become much worse in the past 20 years in the US. I hope Canadians do not let this happen to their country…
US Congress is not interested in promoting savings for Americans. (Well, US Congress is really in no way concerned with Americans, except for the small minority that forks over large sums of money to them…)
What does ‘allied’ mean. CNBC is quite hostile to Obama apart from what comes out of Andrew Ross Sorkin.
I watched this segment yesterday. Said very little except to say that the Roth etc was not very flexible. It’s the flexibility of foreign accounts that makes then not ‘primarily used for retirement’ and hence subject to terrible taxation after losing protection from the tax treaties.
@Neill
What do you mean? Al Sharpton, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Matthews are all HUGE Obama supporters.
@Tim.
Maybe so but they all have programs on MSNBC which is quite different from CNBC.
CNBC is a business station following the markets. Investors don’t like Obama and hence for the most part CNBC is hostile to him as well.
@Tim,
To get your head straight see the Santelli exchange that started the Tea Party.
I am having to deal with the PFIC rules to decide whether the pain and suffering of owning a non US mutual fund is worth it – talk about absolute stupidity in rule making. Regarding CNBC, in many instances, they are anti Obama/anti FATCA and anti CBT. I just think of Dumb and Dumber when I think of Obama and his absurd policies. I can only hope the mid term elections change the control of the Senate and keep Republican control of the House.
@Steve,
It is not worth it. The tax rates will be too high. The longer you hold a PFIC as a US person the worse it gets. The reason for this is that sec 1291 (the PFIC rules) assume that all your gains are divided proportionally into all the years you owned the fund. So less and less of your growth gets attributed to the current year (and so subject only to income tax rates) and instead to a PFIC year with the associated interest (sec 1291 interest).
Of course your growth is geometric. We expect % growth in funds over time not linear from initial investment.
You must file form 8621 / tax lot. For dividends you must file it per tax lot / dividend. So it quickly becomes unmaintainable if you reinvest dividends.
Rick Santelli is right and makes a great comment in the CNBC piece. US Congress’ main concern is to maximize their power… Which they do by picking winners and losers. A complex tax code breeds more and more corruption… Both major political parties could achieve most of what they claim to want from an ideological perspective if they simplified the tax code and promoted this kind of savings by ordinary Americans. But in reality the two parties don’t want such a thing, as it reduces their power. (Congress’ reaction to the Burger King/Tim Hortons inversion is yet another example of how they view things completely from the viewpoint of maximizing control…)
Canada is now clearly better by both “liberal” standards and “economically conservative” standards. Canadians pay approximately the same percentage of taxes as Americans (according to the latest KPMG study), have a higher after tax salary, and receive better government services. I don’t think the average American realizes exactly how much he is being duped. While corruption has always been present, of course, I think it has become much worse in the past 20 years in the US. I hope Canadians do not let this happen to their country…
US Congress is not interested in promoting savings for Americans. (Well, US Congress is really in no way concerned with Americans, except for the small minority that forks over large sums of money to them…)