This may be the wrong thread, but I’m sure Mike Huckabee at some time during his campaign repeated the following misinformation that was included in the Boortz news letter today:
“OK .. just for starters: There is about $13 trillion in dollar-denominated deposits belonging to Americans and American businesses working overseas – offshore – helping to shore up other economies. Why? Because to bring those dollars home would be to subject them to our onerous tax system. So, what could happen if this $13 trillion could come home with no tax consequences? Bush throws us a $150 billion economic stimulus plan and it has some effect. Think what $13 trillion would do.”
As previously discussed, a little research would show that there is indeed $13 trillion or so in offshore deposits, but the owners aren’t American. Only $1.7 trillion is owned by those “filthy rich” from North America, and there are 23 sovereign nations in North America. The estimated American owned offshore holdings is around $700 billion, and the tax revenue from those holdings, if relocated to our shores, would be less than $100 billion. No big deal!
That $13 trillion isn’t coming home because home isn’t here, folks. And if any non American holdings were to relocate to the US, what would be the impact of Section 905, HR25. Seems clear to me that there would be a 23%tax on any foreign owned profits generated in the US? Or whatever existing treaties allow? Why on earth would any canny businessman want to relocate those assets to our shores?
This whole thing is another Fairtax myth, and does great damage to the credibility of the Fairtaxers. Boortz doesn’t seem to care about the facts, but Linder should.
Bush borrows $150 Billion from the Chinese, gives it to consumers, and it does some good for the economy (china’s more than the US’s, but you get the idea).
the FT brings $700 Billion back into this country, ‘gives’ it to business and industry who are allowed to spend it tax free on materials, research and development, and employees.....
how do you think the economic implications of that might compare?
(oh, and nice straw man with the “less than $100Billion in tax revenue”....
federal tax revenue has little to do with consumer confidence....and 23%of $700 is $161)
My comment about the $700 billion creating revenue of less than $100 billion was based on current tax law. I don’t know why you chose to multiply that same $700 billion by 23%, but as I understand it, if that $700 billion returned to the US under the Fairtax, it wouldn’t generate any direct federal tax revenue. I thought that businesses were not taxed under the Fairtax? Am I wrong???
im sure its been brought up, but i barely see any comment on the huge amount of NEW taxpayers. think of all the illegals, off the books workers, drug dealers and their escalades, and every other illegal job for these people will now be paying their fair share.
Uh, there’s nothing here?
Ya, I’m not sure if I should delete it or if Patrick had something else in mind. Odd...
Maybe that’s all Mike Huckabee had to say about the FairTax.
This may be the wrong thread, but I’m sure Mike Huckabee at some time during his campaign repeated the following misinformation that was included in the Boortz news letter today:
“OK .. just for starters: There is about $13 trillion in dollar-denominated deposits belonging to Americans and American businesses working overseas – offshore – helping to shore up other economies. Why? Because to bring those dollars home would be to subject them to our onerous tax system. So, what could happen if this $13 trillion could come home with no tax consequences? Bush throws us a $150 billion economic stimulus plan and it has some effect. Think what $13 trillion would do.”
As previously discussed, a little research would show that there is indeed $13 trillion or so in offshore deposits, but the owners aren’t American. Only $1.7 trillion is owned by those “filthy rich” from North America, and there are 23 sovereign nations in North America. The estimated American owned offshore holdings is around $700 billion, and the tax revenue from those holdings, if relocated to our shores, would be less than $100 billion. No big deal!
That $13 trillion isn’t coming home because home isn’t here, folks. And if any non American holdings were to relocate to the US, what would be the impact of Section 905, HR25. Seems clear to me that there would be a 23%tax on any foreign owned profits generated in the US? Or whatever existing treaties allow? Why on earth would any canny businessman want to relocate those assets to our shores?
This whole thing is another Fairtax myth, and does great damage to the credibility of the Fairtaxers. Boortz doesn’t seem to care about the facts, but Linder should.
P.S.
Here is a link to a Tax Justice Network paper that is the basis for my previouis comments:
http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/upload/pdf/Price_of_Offshore.pdf
Bush borrows $150 Billion from the Chinese, gives it to consumers, and it does some good for the economy (china’s more than the US’s, but you get the idea).
the FT brings $700 Billion back into this country, ‘gives’ it to business and industry who are allowed to spend it tax free on materials, research and development, and employees.....
how do you think the economic implications of that might compare?
(oh, and nice straw man with the “less than $100Billion in tax revenue”....
federal tax revenue has little to do with consumer confidence....and 23%of $700 is $161)
Come on, Justin,
My comment about the $700 billion creating revenue of less than $100 billion was based on current tax law. I don’t know why you chose to multiply that same $700 billion by 23%, but as I understand it, if that $700 billion returned to the US under the Fairtax, it wouldn’t generate any direct federal tax revenue. I thought that businesses were not taxed under the Fairtax? Am I wrong???
im sure its been brought up, but i barely see any comment on the huge amount of NEW taxpayers. think of all the illegals, off the books workers, drug dealers and their escalades, and every other illegal job for these people will now be paying their fair share.