Taxation and Representation

Janet Flanner, Expatriate in ParisMany people have asked me what it’s like living in Switzerland, and how life differs from that of outside the United States. Some of the big differences are how one interacts with the U.S. government itself, and with the States. Let’s discuss two examples over the next few days and whether or not they are fair, the first one being everyone’s favorite subject, taxes.

Here’s one way things don’t change: no matter where you live in the world, if you are a U.S. citizen who receives any sort of income above a very minimal amount, you have to file a tax return. U.S. stands alone in this nearly unique way among other governments. In most other cases you only file taxes (if required at all) in the country in which you reside. However, just because one has to fill out paperwork doesn’t mean one ends up paying the same taxes one would pay as a resident.

The U.S. philosophy is basically this: if you’re paying taxes somewhere else, and you’re not actually working in America, then you can reduce your tax burden by the amount paid. That means that if you never travel to America and the tax rate is higher than what you would pay as a U.S. resident, you pay nothing. On the other hand, if you do visit and work during that visit, then that money is subject to tax. And if the American tax rate is higher than the country in which you reside, you end up paying the difference. It’s more complicated than that (there are housing credits, limits on those credits, an income exclusion, etc), but that’s the jist.

Is any of this easy? No. The amount of paperwork expatriates often have to complete for taxes can measure into the kilograms, just for simple returns. In addition, different tax systems may cause substantial amounts of confusion due to when obligations occur, and when tax bills are finalized, requiring substantial revision over time. And don’t even get me started if you have a more complex situation, like say stock options, whose value has to be accounted for between the time they were granted and the amount of time you’ve spent in the states.

Is this fair? It says that as a U.S. citizen you still have a societal obligation no matter where you live. If you are a citizen and have never lived in the U.S., it may seem unfair. But the government is supposed to be there to protect you if you get into trouble; and you also get to vote for your senator, congressman, and in the presidential race. Certainly to me this seems fair. Citizenship has its responsibilities. In Switzerland, for instance, male citizens must serve in the armed service. It would be unfair if expatriates had to pay a higher rate than other citizens. Depending on your point of view, that has in part taken place, but not to the point that it has impacted me personally.

The IRS has attempted to simplify things somewhat, and you can see their attempt here.

Back in the U.S.S.R.

You may have thought the Soviet Union long dead, and thus it should be, but it is not.  When the Berlin Wall tumbled, so did an entire corrupt way of life for many bureaucrats and butchers.  But under Boris Yeltsin an entire new wave of corruption came to exist in the form of the oligarghs.  The reaction to those thieves was Vladamir Putin, who even though his puppet has been installed, still runs the show in Moscow.

Under Putin, yet another wave of thugery has gone on.  One cannot criticize the government.  Crime still runs rampant, only now it’s organized.  Gangs run massive botnets.  The Soviets have kicked out all foreign entrepeneurs they don’t like (read: anyone who invested in oil).  And now the coup de grace: they are attacking their neighbors in Georgia.

President Bush has stood idly by and let all of this happen.  The real threat isn’t Iraq, it’s Mr. Putin and his thugs.  Perhaps he’s scared of getting beat up for saying these sorts of things.  I am.

Why Extradition of Hackers Is Important

Each day we hear about different forms of fraud and theft on the Internet.  Someone in America gets phished from a computer in the UK that is controlled by another computer in Switzerland, that is controlled by an individual in Italy, and their bank account emptied to a mule in America, and the money ends up with some gang in Russia.

Even if you found the individual in Italy you have to answer this question: where was the crime committed?  The Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe addresses this very question, and fosters cooperation amongst  cooperating societies.  Extradition is so rare that it is worth pointing out when it happens.  On the 30th of July a UK Court refused to block extradition to someone who is accused of having caused many hundreds of thousands of dollars to US government systems.  While in this case the government was a victim, something that happens all too often, far more often it’s individuals who are harmed.  In this case the person sounds a bit disturbed. Let’s hope that next time they extradite people who do this sort of thing to make money, and demonstrate to them that it is not worth the risk.

Because the risk of getting caught is so small, this is an instant where the penalties should be very high when intent on theft, fraud, or disruption of services is clearly evident.

Doha Dead

World trade talks collapsed this week in Doha over food subsidies.  I had previously discussed the potential impact on Switzerland.  However, the collapse of these talks, the inability to reduce barriers, particularly subsidies in the U.S., has harmed countries where agriculture is still the dominant export, or would be if such tarrifs didn’t exist.  The question remains: what protections are appropriate, even absent tarrifs?  What sort of quality standards must be observed?  If they are observed, then does the cost of living and production overcome the cost of transportation?  And is the impact of transport on health and environment understood and accounted for?  Many millions of lives and lifestyles depend on the answers.  Food has to be affordable to all and safe to produce and eat.

Ignore This Day!

Ever wonder how talk show hosts come up with topics?  I’ve been doing this blogging thing now for a month, and I am beginning to gain some appreciation for topic selection.  I’ve often been told that it is better to say nothing at all than to say something meaningless.  Not that I’ve listened, but that’s what I’ve been told.  There are an infinite number of things going on in this world, and a nearly infinite amount of things that I have no opinion on.  So that leaves open a question: if I want to blog regularly, what to talk about?

Today I could complain yet again about the Bush Administration and their perversion of justice by hiring cronies.  I could complain about the fact that they blew the budget by $482 billion, much of which was spent on a war that was mismanaged from the beginning.  I could add to the sympathetic sighs that singer Amy Winehouse continues to go through her travails, or that Kelsey Grammar goes through his.

Instead, this space is reserved for something positive to say about the world.  Not so much today, eh?