Who owns you
-
I disagree... whereever people live, they benefit (hopefully) from the existing government services like roads, schools, water, electricity, hospitals somebody has to pay for all these "free" services which is why we have taxes, right ?
greghop wrote: whereever people live, they benefit (hopefully) from the existing government services like roads, schools, water, electricity, hospitals somebody has to pay for all these "free" services which is why we have taxes, right ? In theory, however as a Canadian living and working in the USA I still have to pay Canadian taxes on my US income. I do not use any of the services my Canadian taxes pay for. You can not imagine how much this irritates me. It is one of the few things that is guaranteed to get me speaking in tongues … sorry I can’t continue I’m getting really pissed off right now just thinking about it. ...cmk Save the whales - collect the whole set
-
This is something that has bothered me for a long time, the concept that we're somehow chattel of the "state" where the "state" is either or both the national government or local government. The best example is also the worst one I could think of. That is a circumstance where a US citizen was arrested in the US for criminal sex acts done in another country. More specifically, he went overseas so he could engage in pedophilia and was arrested in the US for these heinous acts, acts that were performed elsewhere. There are other less vivid examples such as Indiana believing they can tax income generated by rental property that is in another state (my circumstance). The practical effect is that "you" are considered to be property of the state, and I object. What say you? Mike
I would make the distinction betwen the State and the Nation. I don't think I'm a property of the Nation but I'm a part of it. This membership gives me Rights and Duties, defined by the Law. If I disagree with the duties, I can either try to change the Law or find another country and emigrate.
In every work of genius we see our own rejected thought. - François Rabelais
-
greghop wrote: whereever people live, they benefit (hopefully) from the existing government services like roads, schools, water, electricity, hospitals somebody has to pay for all these "free" services which is why we have taxes, right ? In theory, however as a Canadian living and working in the USA I still have to pay Canadian taxes on my US income. I do not use any of the services my Canadian taxes pay for. You can not imagine how much this irritates me. It is one of the few things that is guaranteed to get me speaking in tongues … sorry I can’t continue I’m getting really pissed off right now just thinking about it. ...cmk Save the whales - collect the whole set
-
This is something that has bothered me for a long time, the concept that we're somehow chattel of the "state" where the "state" is either or both the national government or local government. The best example is also the worst one I could think of. That is a circumstance where a US citizen was arrested in the US for criminal sex acts done in another country. More specifically, he went overseas so he could engage in pedophilia and was arrested in the US for these heinous acts, acts that were performed elsewhere. There are other less vivid examples such as Indiana believing they can tax income generated by rental property that is in another state (my circumstance). The practical effect is that "you" are considered to be property of the state, and I object. What say you? Mike
If you are able to be conscripted, or forced into jury service then I think the state maybe has a lein on you. I wouldn't call it ownership. One you didn't mention and a lot of US expats hate is that the US is the only county that taxes both citizens and residents. SO if you took one of those outsourcing jobs in Asia, you still have to pay tax. Also in California, I'm unsure if it still applies if you set up a branch office there, then they would try to tax you on your entire company. I Remember Sony got hit for an incredible bill, that was more then their whole plant was worth. Your Indiana tax Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
-
This is something that has bothered me for a long time, the concept that we're somehow chattel of the "state" where the "state" is either or both the national government or local government. The best example is also the worst one I could think of. That is a circumstance where a US citizen was arrested in the US for criminal sex acts done in another country. More specifically, he went overseas so he could engage in pedophilia and was arrested in the US for these heinous acts, acts that were performed elsewhere. There are other less vivid examples such as Indiana believing they can tax income generated by rental property that is in another state (my circumstance). The practical effect is that "you" are considered to be property of the state, and I object. What say you? Mike
And you know it. :~
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
"I live very much in the real world, it's just not the same world shared by most other people"
-
This is something that has bothered me for a long time, the concept that we're somehow chattel of the "state" where the "state" is either or both the national government or local government. The best example is also the worst one I could think of. That is a circumstance where a US citizen was arrested in the US for criminal sex acts done in another country. More specifically, he went overseas so he could engage in pedophilia and was arrested in the US for these heinous acts, acts that were performed elsewhere. There are other less vivid examples such as Indiana believing they can tax income generated by rental property that is in another state (my circumstance). The practical effect is that "you" are considered to be property of the state, and I object. What say you? Mike
why are you equating "ownership" with "abiding by laws"? you are not owned by the state, in fact it is you who owns the state...
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
-
why are you equating "ownership" with "abiding by laws"? you are not owned by the state, in fact it is you who owns the state...
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
Philip Fitzsimons wrote: why are you equating "ownership" with "abiding by laws"? Abiding by laws is a nearly appropriate view to govern or tax something I do "here" where here is in the USA or the State of Indiana. In my view, abiding by laws becomes state ownership of me when those laws attempt to govern my activities in another country, regardles of how heinous the act save treason or giving aid and comfort to an enemy, or to tax income earned elsewhere. In the case of income earned elsewhere, by what right does a state tax me on income generated by a rental property that is in another state. In my case I own a house, plus half of another, in Texas although I reside in Indiana. Indiana, however, believes it has the right to tax that income although it has done nothing to facilitate that ownership. As Colin points out, the IRS will tax you on income that you earn overseas. By what right? Regardless of the law I don't believe the government has the right to tax that income. Another situation is in regards to out of state purchases made through catalogues or on-line. The State of Indiana believes it has the right to collect a sales tax on merchandise purchased in that manner. Luckily they have no way of tracking such ppurchases so a resident of Indiana is to declare such purchases and pay the sales tax via the state income tax filing process. To voluntarily submit to all of this is to concede that you are not an individual but are an asset of the state. Mike
-
Philip Fitzsimons wrote: why are you equating "ownership" with "abiding by laws"? Abiding by laws is a nearly appropriate view to govern or tax something I do "here" where here is in the USA or the State of Indiana. In my view, abiding by laws becomes state ownership of me when those laws attempt to govern my activities in another country, regardles of how heinous the act save treason or giving aid and comfort to an enemy, or to tax income earned elsewhere. In the case of income earned elsewhere, by what right does a state tax me on income generated by a rental property that is in another state. In my case I own a house, plus half of another, in Texas although I reside in Indiana. Indiana, however, believes it has the right to tax that income although it has done nothing to facilitate that ownership. As Colin points out, the IRS will tax you on income that you earn overseas. By what right? Regardless of the law I don't believe the government has the right to tax that income. Another situation is in regards to out of state purchases made through catalogues or on-line. The State of Indiana believes it has the right to collect a sales tax on merchandise purchased in that manner. Luckily they have no way of tracking such ppurchases so a resident of Indiana is to declare such purchases and pay the sales tax via the state income tax filing process. To voluntarily submit to all of this is to concede that you are not an individual but are an asset of the state. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: As Colin points out, the IRS will tax you on income that you earn overseas. By what right? Regardless of the law I don't believe the government has the right to tax that income. You gave them that right when you voted them in. Since you suggest it is ok to not report your out of state purchases and thus avoid paying state sales tax, then you should just not report the income that is generated by your out of state properties. Create a shell company with a bank account that is offshore. Have the income deposited there. Let the buggers try to figure it out. ;) Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
-
Philip Fitzsimons wrote: why are you equating "ownership" with "abiding by laws"? Abiding by laws is a nearly appropriate view to govern or tax something I do "here" where here is in the USA or the State of Indiana. In my view, abiding by laws becomes state ownership of me when those laws attempt to govern my activities in another country, regardles of how heinous the act save treason or giving aid and comfort to an enemy, or to tax income earned elsewhere. In the case of income earned elsewhere, by what right does a state tax me on income generated by a rental property that is in another state. In my case I own a house, plus half of another, in Texas although I reside in Indiana. Indiana, however, believes it has the right to tax that income although it has done nothing to facilitate that ownership. As Colin points out, the IRS will tax you on income that you earn overseas. By what right? Regardless of the law I don't believe the government has the right to tax that income. Another situation is in regards to out of state purchases made through catalogues or on-line. The State of Indiana believes it has the right to collect a sales tax on merchandise purchased in that manner. Luckily they have no way of tracking such ppurchases so a resident of Indiana is to declare such purchases and pay the sales tax via the state income tax filing process. To voluntarily submit to all of this is to concede that you are not an individual but are an asset of the state. Mike
In the case of income earned elsewhere, by what right does a state tax me on income generated by a rental property that is in another state. In my case I own a house, plus half of another, in Texas although I reside in Indiana. Indiana, however, believes it has the right to tax that income although it has done nothing to facilitate that ownership. does this mean you would be happy to pay the tax to Texas?
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
-
If you are able to be conscripted, or forced into jury service then I think the state maybe has a lein on you. I wouldn't call it ownership. One you didn't mention and a lot of US expats hate is that the US is the only county that taxes both citizens and residents. SO if you took one of those outsourcing jobs in Asia, you still have to pay tax. Also in California, I'm unsure if it still applies if you set up a branch office there, then they would try to tax you on your entire company. I Remember Sony got hit for an incredible bill, that was more then their whole plant was worth. Your Indiana tax Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
I'm not sure what you mean exactly - Canada also taxes both citizins and residents. This makes sense to me, seeing as residents and citizens share the same benefits. Don't complain too much about US taxes - in Canada we pay alot more, and for what? Overcrowded schools and a mediocre health care system. We get taxed when we earn, and taxed when we spend. In Ontario, we pay 15% at the cash register for goods and servies, but a good portion of the subtotal is tax - tax that the retialers, wholesalers and manufacturers had to pay while producing and delivering those goods and services. Aparently, if you buy a new car, you pay tax on it. If your buddy then buys that car off you, he has to pay tax on it all over again. The same car gets taxed each time it changes hands. WTF is up with that? Rise up, people! Grab your pitchforks! :mad: ;P Why is the phrase "It's none of my business" always followed by "BUT..." ;P
-
In the case of income earned elsewhere, by what right does a state tax me on income generated by a rental property that is in another state. In my case I own a house, plus half of another, in Texas although I reside in Indiana. Indiana, however, believes it has the right to tax that income although it has done nothing to facilitate that ownership. does this mean you would be happy to pay the tax to Texas?
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
Philip Fitzsimons wrote: does this mean you would be happy to pay the tax to Texas? Yes. Well not happy per se but I wouldn't find it unreasonable as that is where the income is earned and it couldn't be earned (theoretically) without services provided by the State of Texas, or more specifically, the city of Garland. Mike
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: As Colin points out, the IRS will tax you on income that you earn overseas. By what right? Regardless of the law I don't believe the government has the right to tax that income. You gave them that right when you voted them in. Since you suggest it is ok to not report your out of state purchases and thus avoid paying state sales tax, then you should just not report the income that is generated by your out of state properties. Create a shell company with a bank account that is offshore. Have the income deposited there. Let the buggers try to figure it out. ;) Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
Chris Meech wrote: then you should just not report the income that is generated by your out of state properties. I tried this once. The way it works though is you do your federal return then the state requires you to provide your gross federal reported income from line whatever. That gross income includes the Schedule C rental income information. I went on a tirade one year and subtracted the rental income before entering it on the state form. Problem was they cross checked and I got a supplemental bill and a tersly worded missle. Mike
-
cmk wrote: as a Canadian living and working in the USA I still have to pay Canadian taxes on my US income. Do you have to pay US taxes as well? Debbie
Debs wrote: cmk wrote: as a Canadian living and working in the USA I still have to pay Canadian taxes on my US income. Do you have to pay US taxes as well? Yes, but as there is a tax treaty between the two countries i'm not double taxed (which would leave me with nothing). So let's say I make US$100K in the US. First I pay US taxes on the US$100K, lets say US$35K. Then I have to convert the US$ to equiv. CAN$ (there are a couple ways to do this) to get my total income in CAN$. Let's say this works out to CAN$150K. I then calculate Canadian taxes on this, lets say CAN$70K. They are nice enough to let me subtract the US$35 already paid to the US leaving me with CAN$17.5K to pay to Canada ... for nothing. In order to avoid this I would have to give up my Canadian residency status. However, there are a list of requirements to do this to show you aren't doing it just to avoid paying taxes. I don't quite meet the requirements, nor is it feasible to jump through the hoops to do so in the near future (basically break all ties to Canada). ...cmk Save the whales - collect the whole set