• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Panama Papers Mossack Fonseca Leak

praktik

TRIBE Member
Maybe we should have offered more tax breaks to the rich? With super low taxes no need for shell companies, amirite?
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
You know another option: its just too tough to figure out what all this means - maybe we should lock up all wealthy people and not let anymore in until we can figure out what's going on??
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
Maybe we should have offered more tax breaks to the rich? With super low taxes no need for shell companies, amirite?
That's right! and then they can afford to invest in opportunities -- which means jobs for everyone! it all trickles down uc
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
Reading your unoriginal faux outrage is like watching a bad Steven Colbert impersonator hindered by a couple massive strokes bumble through his monologue.

Your simplistic and annoying synopses of complicated economic issues will probably drive more wealthy people to evade taxes so they don't have to keep your obnoxious flapping mouth fed and watered.
I don't think it's that complicated actually. I'm not sure how I feel about offshore accounts. On one hand, merely having a bank account in a country not your residence doesn't seem so bad. Like if you're going to Vegas having a bank account there to avoid currency change fees etc. If you visit Europe often enough for work or something it's definitely useful.

If your incorporating in a country not primarily where the company will do business, however, isn't the purpose solely to avoid taxation? That's the parlance, correct - tax avoidance? and then there are the companies that don't actually do business anywhere, but these lawyers seem to be good at getting documentation so everything is nice and legal.

So then what's that called?
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
If you really want "false outrage", take a gander at Canada tells tax collectors to get hold of Panama Papers info | Toronto Star . I don't even know if this reporter actually exists because he seems to be the shill of the marketers for "Canadians". Disregarding the fact that the legality of anything CRA comes up with is suspect, it's telling that this "look-see" didn't happen with the leaked US State Department memos, which makes it seem moreso the distraction-type news you see every so often.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Its basically a trapping of the upper class - all kinds will have had their hands in this pie and I bet you most of it is going to be innocuous.

Its like how poor people have Big Gulps, most wealthy people have a holding company or access to one they share with other wealthy people.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
To be clear, like along with the boring shit theres gonna be a pile of chicanery, but theres lots of reasons for wealthy individuals and corporations to have normal, boring functions served by these kinds of entities
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
To be clear, like along with the boring shit theres gonna be a pile of chicanery, but theres lots of reasons for wealthy individuals and corporations to have normal, boring functions served by these kinds of entities
The entire point of it is to minimize taxes and/or use a banking system with different requirements than a home country.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Ya i dont really have a frame of reference though for what % of overall activity is actually illicit, which in turn is a subset of "tax avoidance" (not all of which is illegal) and which would be distinct from more mundane concerns which have nothing to do with tax avoidance or "minimization" strategies.

And all I know is the real world is most often more boring than the headlines...
 

ndrwrld

TRIBE Member
the lawyers here made out like fucking bandits.
hide corporate / private peeps money, take a cut, and do the same thing.

there is an obvious forced delay to release names here in Canada and the US.
 

Bass-Invader

TRIBE Member
I think the tax inversion rules were changed a while back. It resulted in AbbVie pulling out of its takeover of UK based Shire. Or perhaps its a discretionary thing, and the prevailing view given the media exposure is that the discretion will be exercised to not allow inversion takeovers or whatever.
 

Bass-Invader

TRIBE Member
But, in 2010, the United States and Panama signed a trade-promotion agreement that, among other things, obliged Panama to provide to the U.S. authorities, on request, “information regarding the ownership of companies, partnerships, trusts, foundations, and other persons, including . . . . ownership information on all such persons in an ownership chain.” Higgins pointed out, “If Panama had ever been an attractive destination for American offshore storage of funds, this agreement shut the door on that possibility.”
Is this the agreement that Bernie Sanders is referring to in his recent anti-panama agreement video clip?
 

Wiseman

TRIBE Member
Ya i dont really have a frame of reference though for what % of overall activity is actually illicit, which in turn is a subset of "tax avoidance" (not all of which is illegal) and which would be distinct from more mundane concerns which have nothing to do with tax avoidance or "minimization" strategies.

And all I know is the real world is most often more boring than the headlines...

Describe "more mundane concerns". I admit I don't know much about this stuff but I'm curious what reasons other than Tax avoidance offshore accounts there are.
 
Top