[grudabor]

Aussie Prick will like this

Stanford Claimed ‘War Chest’ to Woo Virgin Islands Tax Break
By Ryan J. Donmoyer

Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- R. Allen Stanford told U.S. Virgin Islands authorities two years he had “a very large war chest of cash,” a claim that may anger investors who lost access to their money after the Securities and Exchange Commission charged the billionaire with massive fraud.

Stanford also told members of the Virgin Islands Economic Development Commission that his 62 companies, in which he was the sole shareholder, managed more than $30 billion and that he was ready to invest about $2 billion in the island of St. Croix and elsewhere in the Caribbean in exchange for the right to reduce his personal U.S. tax bill by 90 percent.

“I am a very large target to pay taxes” and this is a driving force” for his proposal to relocate his headquarters from Houston to St. Croix, Stanford told the commission at a public hearing on Nov. 30, 2006, according to a transcript. Nine months earlier, he began fighting the U.S. Internal Revenue Service over an unpaid tax bill that reached more than $104.2 million in August 2008.

The testimony may create a new avenue court-appointed receiver Ralph Janvey can explore in his hunt for Stanford Financial Group assets that can be released to Stanford’s alleged victims.

Janvey said yesterday some mutual-fund assets should be released from a court-ordered freeze, although he previously said customers generally can’t withdraw cash or close accounts. Experts said Janvey may need a decade to finish repaying victims.

...

To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: February 26, 2009 00:01 EST

[Xiciljed]

The IRS and ATO are closely tied you know.

What is interesting is past comments made by you with reference to taxation. Of course the wealthy should be taxed more and you are correct. But what is the socially acceptable cut off mark to place a burden of taxation on its citizens? What has the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy really done?

The whole reason why I favor US vs Australian taxation is WHERE the burden of taxation is placed. Tax cuts for those earning less than USD$ 250,000 (S$/A$400,000) were announced recently by the Obama Administration. That means 95% of all American taxpayers will get a further tax cut, those earning less than 400K per year, on top of the Bush tax cuts. Those Republicans and others earning more than 400K are livid with rage. Wall St is not happy. The CNBC Newscasters is in tears. Rick Santelli is under a great deal of stress now that the party is over.

My issue with Australian taxation is it places too much burden on the middle class.
If you earn more, you should pay more, I think everone is in agreement on this issue. But at which point do you begin to designate this burden on a class of taxpayers? I understand the population is small, and cant support low taxes for the middle class, but this is an imporant issue for migrants. In America those earning 400K and below really dont pay that much. Australia just loses this competitive edge, even if it has other things going for it.

Really, I support Obama. Let those earning 400K pay alot more. But is this cut off a responsible level to place the burden on? That is the question.......He might turn out to be wrong, but then again lets review the Bush years........the greed on Wall St was historic.

[grudabor]

The IRS and ATO are closely tied you know.

What is interesting is past comments made by you with reference to taxation. Of course the wealthy should be taxed more and you are correct. But what is the socially acceptable cut off mark to place a burden of taxation on its citizens? What has the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy really done?

The whole reason why I favor US vs Australian taxation is WHERE the burden of taxation is placed. Tax cuts for those earning less than USD$ 250,000 (S$/A$400,000) were announced recently by the Obama Administration. That means 95% of all American taxpayers will get a further tax cut, those earning less than 400K per year, on top of the Bush tax cuts. Those Republicans and others earning more than 400K are livid with rage. Wall St is not happy. The CNBC Newscasters is in tears. Rick Santelli is under a great deal of stress now that the party is over.

My issue with Australian taxation is it places too much burden on the middle class.
If you earn more, you should pay more, I think everone is in agreement on this issue. But at which point do you begin to designate this burden on a class of taxpayers? I understand the population is small, and cant support low taxes for the middle class, but this is an imporant issue for migrants. In America those earning 400K and below really dont pay that much. Australia just loses this competitive edge, even if it has other things going for it.

Really, I support Obama. Let those earning 400K pay alot more. But is this cut off a responsible level to place the burden on? That is the question.......He might turn out to be wrong, but then again lets review the Bush years........the greed on Wall St was historic.

That is because Australia support middle-income welfare and a broad aged pension scheme. But a lot of things will change soon in the aim to simplify taxation.

Corporate tax has fallen again. Good for me.

[Phlkxkbh]

250K is nothing at all if you are living in one of the coastal cities like NYC, where all the JOBS are. it is ludicrous that simply earning 250k a year can put u in the top 1% income bracket, it really dosent take a lot and points to the great wealth disparity in the USA, a catalyst for SOCIAL DISASTER. AVOID Usa at all costs.

[Phlkxkbh]

Aussie Prick will like this

Stanford Claimed ‘War Chest’ to Woo Virgin Islands Tax Break
By Ryan J. Donmoyer

Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- R. Allen Stanford told U.S. Virgin Islands authorities two years he had “a very large war chest of cash,” a claim that may anger investors who lost access to their money after the Securities and Exchange Commission charged the billionaire with massive fraud.

Stanford also told members of the Virgin Islands Economic Development Commission that his 62 companies, in which he was the sole shareholder, managed more than $30 billion and that he was ready to invest about $2 billion in the island of St. Croix and elsewhere in the Caribbean in exchange for the right to reduce his personal U.S. tax bill by 90 percent.

“I am a very large target to pay taxes” and this is a driving force” for his proposal to relocate his headquarters from Houston to St. Croix, Stanford told the commission at a public hearing on Nov. 30, 2006, according to a transcript. Nine months earlier, he began fighting the U.S. Internal Revenue Service over an unpaid tax bill that reached more than $104.2 million in August 2008.

The testimony may create a new avenue court-appointed receiver Ralph Janvey can explore in his hunt for Stanford Financial Group assets that can be released to Stanford’s alleged victims.

Janvey said yesterday some mutual-fund assets should be released from a court-ordered freeze, although he previously said customers generally can’t withdraw cash or close accounts. Experts said Janvey may need a decade to finish repaying victims.

...

To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: February 26, 2009 00:01 EST

with OBONGO's communism, more of the wealthy will leave USA. it is becoming a DISASTER for wealth creation. with atrocious gift and estate taxes, your descendants will have nothing left.

poor OBONGO does not understand that the wealthy are the greatest producers of the economy which filters down to everyone down the chain. Capital and production are rapidly being destroyed by OBONGO, a communist negro.

today the greatest capitalists are in China, no more USA.

[Xiciljed]

That is because Australia support middle-income welfare and a broad aged pension scheme. But a lot of things will change soon in the aim to simplify taxation.

Corporate tax has fallen again. Good for me.

This discussion can get very complicated. Should Australia actually lower the tax burden on the middle class to the point where they can pay as little as their American Counterparts, i.e. where 95% of the people pay little or no tax, then that would be excellent news for most Australians and potential Migrants. I would be far less critical of Australia in that case.

As for corporate, remember the US and even Australian tax systems are a study in themselves, both allow deductions but the American Model allows more deductions and opportunites to minimize tax than the Australian model.

What Obama has done is announce tax penalties for those that outsource American jobs for the sake of enhancing profits/efficiency. Wall St has often reported the numbers the street was looking for but many of these company has outsourced operations to save costs.

Would this happen in Australia? Does Obama sound like Rudd?

Obama has the capitalists reeling. Expect alot of negative press.......Read an article India is quite upset with Obama over this.....

[Xiciljed]

250K is nothing at all if you are living in one of the coastal cities like NYC, where all the JOBS are. it is ludicrous that simply earning 250k a year can put u in the top 1% income bracket, it really dosent take a lot and points to the great wealth disparity in the USA, a catalyst for SOCIAL DISASTER. AVOID Usa at all costs.

What a load of crap!

95% all taxpayers will benefit with lower costs.95% of all taxpayers are looking forward to tax cuts. 95% will consume more.

I did not know Charlotte, NC a low cost area with many high paying jobs, will not benefit. You had better contact them and tell them the bad news, I am sure they would be surprised and all the PHds will leave the area! Same goes for many other areas in America where high paying jobs are..........

Only someone like you can sit there and suggest S$400,000 a year is not much to live on when Sydney is more expensive to live in than New York!!!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...18/2192181.htm
Sydney more expensive to live than NY: report

You have been discredited you twit

[Phlkxkbh]

What a load of crap!

95% all taxpayers will benefit with lower costs.95% of all taxpayers are looking forward to tax cuts. 95% will consume more.

I did not know Charlotte, NC a low cost area with many high paying jobs, will not benefit. You had better contact them and tell them the bad news, I am sure they would be surprised and all the PHds will leave the area! Same goes for many other areas in America where high paying jobs are..........

Only someone like you can sit there and suggest S$400,000 a year is not much to live on when Sydney is more expensive to live in than New York!!!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...18/2192181.htm
Sydney more expensive to live than NY: report

You have been discredited you twit

with your shitty lifestyle, even 10k a year is enough for you

[Xiciljed]

with your shitty lifestyle, even 10k a year is enough for you

I just love to irritate you. Its just so much fun

Like America's super low taxes