They’ll even go back in time to steal your money…

by Simon Black · View Comments

July 13, 2010
Bath, England

It’s no secret that the government– any government– has nearly unlimited authority to do whatever they want, whenever they want. They can bend the rules, spin reality, and use their national constitutions like a roll of cheap, single-ply toilet paper.

Lately, governments have been unafraid to increase the size and scope of their powers, making drastic changes often with near immediate effect.

For example, UK Chancellor George Osborne shocked British investors several weeks ago when he announced that capital gains tax rates would increase for many Brits effective midnight that same evening.

Not to be outdone by Chancellor Osborne, the United States Congress has actually gone back in time and made retroactive changes to tax and reporting regulations. There are some recent instances of this in 2010’s controversial HIRE Act.

Even better, Canada’s Legislature amended the Retail Sales Tax Act earlier this year to be retroactive effective May 1997. The amendment specifically affected certain companies which had to come out of pocket for 12-years worth of tax that they had previously been exempt from. Ouch.

Today marks another example of the government showing us how quickly it is willing and able to make changes. Effective today, the United States Department of State is increasing fees for consular services across the board– things like visas, passports, and notary services.

The state department made this announcement just two weeks ago; the thing that caught my eye and sparked this letter today is their new $450 fee for renunciation of US citizenship.

This is a brand new fee that has never been imposed before. Apparently the number of Americans queuing up at embassies around the world to renounce their citizenship is exploding so rapidly that the State Department had to formalize the process and tack on a fee… this, of course, on top of the 30% exit tax.

With all of these examples, there’s really one single point that I want to drive home today: you can only kick the can down the road for so long…

By that I mean, these examples show that governments are constantly finding creative new ways to increase their domain and grow their tax revenue. We cannot count on any level of stability– what’s accepted and allowed today can change tomorrow.

The only thing we can really count on is the pace of change– how quickly and how drastically governments will reshape the system to suite their own needs at our expense.

All of these changes have an effect. Some are large (retroactive tax code changes, an overnight revaluation of a currency) and some are small (higher fees for a passport). As we go forward, though, you can expect these changes to be more surprising, more swift, and more painful.

It’s easy to kick the can down the road and say, “well I’ll take action later when things start to get really bad.” This approach might work for a while, but the logic will abruptly run out only once it’s too late.

Protecting yourself and your assets– moving some money to a foreign jurisdiction, scouting out locations for a new home overseas, exploring second citizenship opportunities, etc.– can be accomplished by investing some time and energy right now and making it a priority.

I really want to encourage you to make every effort to start this process as quickly as possible. Put it on the calendar, call it a midsummer resolution… whatever works. I don’t want you to be one of the people who wakes up one day and is completely enslaved by capital controls or a military police state.

Also bear in mind that whenever you step outside of your home country, wherever that may be, there is literally a world of opportunity waiting for you.

In the coming days and weeks, I plan on releasing some new information, including a free, short video series about steps you can take right now, as well as a comprehensive “going global” overview that I co-wrote with my friends over at Casey Research.

More to follow, stay tuned.

Share this article using the links below:
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • email
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us

  • Oluwole
    surprised sweden isn`t on the list
  • JSHELL2U
    Telecommunications tycoon Walter Anderson, a man accused of being the biggest tax cheat in U.S. history, will remain in jail until his trial, which will commence in either in late spring or early summer.

    Anderson, 51, has been in federal custody since he was arrested last month at Dulles International Airport. He will be facing charges of concealing nearly $450 million of his personal income in offshore shell corporations and for failure to pay over $200 million he owed in federal and District of Columbia taxes for over two decades.

    In bond hearing last week both Anderson, who was attempting to negotiate his release on bond, and his attorney argued that he had been a lifelong resident of the Washington D.C. area and that he intended to defend himself against government accusations. In an interview with the Washington Post, Mr. Anderson stated the government's charges were inaccurate and that not all of his income was for his personal use, but also for the benefit of a charitable foundation that he managed.

    Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled that there was "ample reason to doubt that Mr. Anderson would appear for trial if released." He further added that the grand jury indictment portrayed Anderson as a man who moved hundreds of millions of dollars out of the United States through a web of corporations located in Panama, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the British Virgin Islands and also kept this hidden for more than a decade.

    Judge Friedman also noted that Anderson had concealed his identity by using aliases and had many properties and connections in other countries, thereby making it easy for him to hide from U.S. law enforcement.

    "The nature and the circumstances of the offense with which Mr. Anderson is charged demonstrate not only his considerable incentive to flee and evade prosecution, but also his considerable experience in conducting business abroad and moving money and assets across borders without detection," the judge wrote.

  • Zarquon007
    With regards to the following:

    "Even better, Canada’s Legislature amended the Retail Sales Tax Act earlier this year to be retroactive effective May 1997. The amendment specifically affected certain companies which had to come out of pocket for 12-years worth of tax that they had previously been exempt from. Ouch."

    It is a little big disingeneous to state this without the background:
    a) It was NOT Canada's legislature, but the province of Ontario
    b) It was not to collect sales tax from 13 years past, it is a tax that businesses have already been paying and the law was a clarification/change to address a court decisiont (you might find it sneaky, but my point in stating this is that companies are not having to go back and pay back sales tax for 13 years as they have already been paid. Actually in Canada you don't have to keep records for more than 7 years, so it would be impossible go back that far and collect).

    It is one thing to complain about the feeling of being overtaxed, but commenting on things without bringing the context goes a long way to discredit your points to anyone that already doesn't feel that way. If all you want to do is preach to the choir, then fine.
  • I love the fact that the US exit tax seems to go under the doublespeak name of "Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act" (HEART Act).

    It seems to be a consistent theme in US legislation to try to come up with doublespeak abbrevations that no one would dare to oppose without being painted as HEARTless (excuse the pun..).
  • DD
    Hi Simon

    How much risk is a foreigner getting themselves into by having a precious metal account with places like KITCO in the US and Goldmoney from the UK.

    I assume governments are more likely to impose capital controls on non resident, overseas investors/foreigners, as we don’t vote.

    Thanks
    D
  • Zarquon007
    Risk in what sense?

    With regards to any US located investment for a foreigner, unless you are in a restricted country like Cuba or North Korea, when you dispose of the assets, there is a withholding tax on the gain (not the principal, just the increase in value). This can be returned based on your eventual taxation rate (if you had a losses that covered your gains) for that year, but to do that, you need to file an income tax return for the US for that year.

    I don't have anything invested directly in the UK so I am not aware of how it works there.
  • sky king
    simon,i doubt our readers are aware of the contorted,power-trip between us and uk consulates,dilemma that the iroqouis nationals lacrosse team is in currently . they are scheduled to play england on thursday in manchester,the site of the world games ,the equivalent of the olympics - every 4 years . they have traveled for years abroad with their Haudenosaunee (the name for the iroquois confederacy of 6 tribes ) passports until now. the usa bosses won't let them out unless they switch to u.s. the brits won't let them in unless the u.s. will let them back in . if my history serves me right,they signed a treaty w/ the british declaring the iroquois as a sovereign nation w/ wampum belts and official formalities back before the u.s. was a nation .it seems that there is a power struggle going on here, which is yor point in today's missive - that governments will do whatever they like , whenever they want ! i played against the iroquois in the 1998 world games in baltimore , and they honor the game in the highest regard . they were still playing w/ wooden sticks and man do they hurt !but they were true gentleman . as of now they are stuck w/ a $23,000 delay fee which is a lot of money to fund-raise for them . i truly hope it works out for them , because it will not be a true world games w/out them - they , along w/ other native american tribes started this awesome sport. for more info go to laxpower.com , then go to indiancountrytoday.com.
  • Jai
    The Iroquois are US citizens - they can vote, collect welfare from US taxpayers, and have endless special privileges in violation of the "Equal Protection" clause. Their handwritten "passports" do not pass muster.

    And as for the $23,000, that's not a lot of $$ when they are making so much from their casino that hardly a one of them ever works. I just went to their shop, and guess what - not one Native American clerking there. They hire others at minimum wage. Having been to other reservations elsewhere, I don't believe any "pleas of poverty" from any of them. Elsewhere, not a one of them worked, either.
  • Zarquon007
    Some on the Iroquois team is composed of people that are considered US or Canadian citizens. The issue isn't the UK though, it is the recently enabled law that the US has passed requiring that anyone entering the US must have documentation that meets certain requirements. Under this law, a passport qualifies, but there are other forms of identification that meets the requirement. The UK government is just making sure that anyone that enters the UK can also leave (go back to their country of origin).

    Frustrating, yes, but blaming the UK isn't really the solution.
  • Nama49
    You are not only misinformed but also have not done your homework traveling the United States to Reservations that are so poor you could not believe it is within the same boundry as the America you live in. You frequent the Reservations with Casinos only shame on you..
  • Jai
    I'll second Capt Gabe. Only one duck is missing from my row.

    As for Canadian perfidy, beware any govt which enacts retroactive laws. Anytime what is legal today could be rendered criminal/taxable/whatever & punishable tomorrow creates only a climate of fear, distrust, graft & subterfuge.

    Another perfidy is the elimination of statutes of limitations ex post facto. Example from the US: Congress eliminated the statute of limitations on student loans as well as eliminated them from the possibility of bankruptcy.

    Are you thinking you're glad borrowers have to cough up and repay their student loans? Well, you're an idiot - the govt went after people who repaid their loans years ago, and no longer had their paperwork since the statute of limitations (7 years) had passed since completing repayment. I personally know several people who had paid off loans in full years earlier who got hit for repayment all over again - plus interest and penalties! One person I know got hit for over $20,000 - they had only borrowed $1000 back in the 1970's and repaid it by about 1981. Without the long-discarded old paperwork, they could no longer prove it had already been repaid. What if they did that to your income taxes, and you had to now prove you were all paid up from back, oh, say, 1980, 1990, or even 2000?
  • Zarquon007
    While not saying that this happens all the time, the use of retroactivity is usually only ever used in situations where people should know that it is going to happen. The Province of Ontario situation mistakenly described as a government of canada situation was a situation where the tax was already paid, and a court decision on a technicallity reinterpreted the law, so the retroactivity went back to change the term back to the original law. No company will have to pay back taxes.

  • Roq
    Sorry to be off topic but I just thought you may be interested in this: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/heading-for-a-windfall/story-e6frfh4f-1225891388151

    Whats youre take?
  • Roq
    Very interesting article. Simon, I have to confess, when I first subscribed to this blog, albeit I found it really connected with me, I thought you were being a little bit dramatic in your immediate calls to action to leave the US (or equivalent), but this article really is a wake up call. It is clear, the sooner you act on diversifying yourself and your assets, the better you will be.
  • Boris V.
    I was telling Americans how we had to pay a steep fee so Soviet government could strip our citizenship from us before we may emigrate. It was about 2-month average salary, not a petty money. That was always amazing to US citizens since they would never imagine how State would ask you to pay for taking something away from you. Now they don't need to imagine. Wow...
  • Zarquon007
    A situation only present because the US taxes based on citizenship and residence, not just residence.

    If the United States didn't require expatriate citizens to file and pay income tax, then there wouldn't be an issue. People would emigrate (more than likely to their ancestral homeland) and that would be it. It is the requirement to pay income tax after they have emigrated that makes people do this.
  • Capt'n Gabe
    I'll look forward to your video series. Moving abroad is something I've worked toward for many years. I grew up moving around the world and find national diversification to be enjoyable and more personally secure. Over the years I have mastered Mandarin, German, and Russian and can easily learn more or quickly re-master the former by immersion. I possess a broad range of skills. At this point, the only missing element to a move is what I am currently working on: the source of income I shall be moving under.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: