IRS has a method of last resort to collect overdue taxes: Revoking your passport
cnbc.com
cnbc.com
A number of provisions in the US Immigration and Nationality Act, INA, whereby somebody born in the US could lose citizenship have been repealed or declared unconstitutional. Lost citizenship was not automatically restored when the INA was amended. You would have to apply for reinstatement.
But the obligation and accounting fees to file tax and FATCA forms with the IRS are a major deterrent if you are living outside the US.
I had a long conversation inside a border post on this topic until suspected consultation with higher-ups at the Port office clued in the local officers and they suddenly said "Have a good day!" without further explanation.
Since then I've carried a copy of the State Department 7 FAM 1200 APPENDIX C, but haven't seen further CBP curiosity about my possible US citizenship; I suspect there is now a note in my file entry that I am not a US citizen.
This very thinking is what they want: where we blame each other for the trouble that they have caused.
No, I don't think calling a normal citizen a criminal is correct or just.
Apply equally or not at all.
People thought you had to have a king. Then Thomas Paine wrote *Common Sense* explaining that life goes on fine without somebody ordering you around all day.
Taxes can all be paid voluntary. Right now we think the only way is to use the old vestiges of force from times gone by… but in future years we will be appalled that people went to prison for any reason, let alone taxes.
It’s important when thinking about government to realize that we are still in the toddler phase. Just learning how to not abuse it to hit the people we don’t like.
Adulthood is when all government seeks the best for all citizens.
But as it stands… pay your taxes lol!
We (the US) tried that with the Articles of Confederation and it doesn’t work. So much so that the founders got together and threw it away in favor of the Constitution. Funding the government must be done by force for it to work.
Since the U.S. issues its own fiat currency, revenue isn't necessary to fund expenditures—the government can create new money as needed. Also, since the Constitution explicitly grants the power to issue and regulate money to Congress, it has long been argued that an independent central bank like the Federal Reserve is unconstitutional.
Or are you implying that they already print some money today so they can just print a lot more? Why do you think the government doesn't just print $45T and eliminate all their debt? I mean why doesn't every economically poorer country just print the equivalent of $100T and leap past the US?
The Federal Reserve processes payments for the federal government, manages the the flow of money through banks, and acts as the bank of last resort. It is also, very importantly, not an independent bank; it was created and authorized by Congressional statute to be the central bank of the U.S..
So the government technically can spend without taxing, but not if it wants to remain effective.
What innovations would we have today technologically if people said that about AI for example. Imagine if Elon said “no point in making openai. AGI has been tried and failed”
It’s was tried hundreds of years ago in the days before the internet. That alone should give us the courage to try again. Things happen so quickly now, we could set up a different incentive structure.
Let’s say you have 10 billion dollars. Would you pay 1% annually to have it protected by the government?
If you fail to pay.. no visits by the irs. You’re golden… but if somebody steals, since you didn’t pay your “social contract” and give back part of it to government and social programs, you don’t get protection.
I think this is a very basic idea. I’m just saying we need to be creative and have the courage to try new ideas. Failure is ok! That’s how we know we are growing.
It’s like my dad said. “If you aren’t making mistakes, it generally means you are working for someone who is”
In other words the leaders of the world make mistakes as part of the process of growing. Let’s stand up and change things. It may not work perfect, but at least we will learn so those after us can do better!
It worked fine when the state was kept small.
It’s impossible. There’s no way he can defend his empire. There’s no way he could have gotten his empire in the first place. It all rests on the strength government provides.
So you make a simple rule. Government requires 1% of net worth annually to protect your money.
If somebody steals from you, and you didn’t pay tax… your choice. He would pay. Everyone would pay.
Why would government do that? It’s the social compact. In order for the billionaire to keep his money, the government would require a fee to be paid to charity.
Not complicated. But as I said, we are still in the infancy of government. We are innovating faster now, but imagine innovating in government as fast as we do in Silicon Valley… that’s the goal!
Unless you're suggesting some other kinds of consequences for failing to pay taxes, what is the incentive for complying with this voluntary tax payment scheme? And if there is no incentive, why would anyone pay taxes, except to put themselves at a purchasing-power disadvantage relative to their non-taxpaying fellows?
I think even proponents of modern monetary theory even think taxes are necessary, although from the perspective of MMT governments can fund programs by printing money and only need to use taxes to control inflation.
I suppose under that perspective the government could simply print extra money and distribute it selectively to control who is affected by inflation, but that would be a fairly unusual approach even by the standards of MMT which is fairly controversial.
Otherwise, you need some type of taxes for anything that requires government spending, and essentially everyone who believes that governments should exist wants at least some forms of government spending.