The “1 Percent” Exodus

"Certainly, there is an ominous sound to the fact that, according to the INS/Census Bureau & Zogby International, the top one percent of U.S. taxpayers are leaving at the highest rate in history. But the numbers relative to the general population are fairly small. The troubling element here? The trend is straight upward. According to an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) report, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2011, the number of people who have given up their citizenship, or terminated their long-term, permanent residency status has increased nearly nine-fold. Quarterly averages in 2008 and 2009 were 58 and 186, respectively. In 2010 the average jumped to 384 per quarter, and in the first quarter of 2011, 499 ex-pats bid America a permanent adios.

Why are they leaving?"

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/02/06/the- ... t-exodus/#

A lot of supposition in that column.

So, the people with the megabucks don't want to pay the same percentage in taxes that the middle class pays. Good citizens, aren't they?

There is a difference between being a good citizen and being a sap. When the average tax rate is 11% and the 1% pay 40% of the tax revenue, you start seeing your goverment as a blood sucking parasite.

2wlady wrote: A lot of supposition in that column.

So, the people with the megabucks don't want to pay the same percentage in taxes that the middle class pays. Good citizens, aren't they?

Supposition? Really? Just exactly where is the "supposition" in this quote....

The trend is straight upward. According to an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) report, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2011, the number of people who have given up their citizenship, or terminated their long-term, permanent residency status has increased nearly nine-fold . Quarterly averages in 2008 and 2009 were 58 and 186, respectively. In 2010 the average jumped to 384 per quarter, and in the first quarter of 2011, 499 ex-pats bid America a permanent adios.

I predicted this would be one of the results of Obama's and the Left's class warfare tatic. People with wealth would take their money to more friendly climates. The money goes where it is treated the best.

Obama has been slapping around the most productive, most successful people like they are red headed stepchildren. The result of these constant attacks and continual threats to tax them even more than their already dis-proportionate levels has consequences- the wealthy have options and they will excersize those options.

And those on the left don't seem to be too concerned either- and they should be because without these people and their money- the socialists plan to fleece the one's with money and re-distribute their wealth is out the door big time.

America used to be the place that people with money flocked to- to invest, to live, to raise their families, to pass on their fortunate circumstances to their children.

Now they are leaving in record numbers- and taking their money and their investments with them.

Good job Obama- in three years you made New Zealand and Europe look like a better place to be than America! That's saying somthing.

Keep on with the class warfare tatics- it won't be long before no-one will invest in the USA for fear that they will make a profit and be vilified by an envious population of entitlement minded socialists- and a ravenous, blood thristy government.

Good thing they loved the country that gave them the opportunity to become the 1%. Good riddance.

2wlady wrote: A lot of supposition in that column.

So, the people with the megabucks don't want to pay the same percentage in taxes that the middle class pays. Good citizens, aren't they?

Probably some of the best ones around, truth be told. Tell me 2w, why isn't the solution to the inequality of the tax rates to lower the rates of the middle class? Doing so would achieve the desired goal of equalizing the rates at which the rich and the middle class are taxed, wouldn't it?

Why are even avowed leftists like James Cameron relocating their families and becoming ex-pats? Why does Oprah have someone tracking the exact number of days she resides in her California residence to avoid being declared a full time resident of that state and subject to its tax rates? Because they can. This is what the "progressives" fail to understand and factor into their class warfare policy - what will happen as a result.

New York City, and State, are shedding millionaires faster than they can be created because of their tax policies. It has one of the most concentrated populations of those in the top 5% of income earners and is losing representation in the general Congress with each and every census, When FDR was the governor of NY, it had 45 seats in the House. Their tally now stands at 27 seats. New York lost 2 seats after the 2000 census and it lost another 2 after the 2010 census. Texas and Florida, which have no state income taxes, each gained seats after the census was taken. What does this tell you 2w? What it tells me is that the rich, unlike the poor, are not staked to their current location. Punish them enough for succeeding and you will drive them out, along with their money, and they will then set up their successful enterprises somewhere else where they are punished less for being successful. The next movie that James Cameron makes, his income will not be taxed as if he were a citizen of California - they have lost that tax revenue, as has the federal government. New Zealand will get that revenue instead. New Zealand will also likely get the employment taxes for the crew that shoots his his next film - which means that jobs, which we need more of, will also follow him offshore, reducing the tax revenue further still.

Why "progressives" fail to understand this simple reality even in the wake of the Clinton-era luxury taxes is simply beyond my ability to comprehend. It is simple common sense after all, isn't it? When wars are fought you create refugees and class warfare is no different, except for who the refugees are. When you proclaim an intention to prosecute an economic war by taking more from successful people, of course they are going to become economic refugees if they have the ability to do so. Would GM, or GE, or Apple, be looking for ways to earn money in foreign markets that was not subject to taxation here if the tax policy here was more favorable than the tax policies of those foreign markets? Of course not, they would be looking for any and every excuse to earn the money here to gain the benefit of the more favorable tax policy - which expands this economy, which provides more domestic jobs, which broadens the tax base even further.

The desired effect is to create more wealthy people, isn't it? I mean, it's OK to have a shrinking middle class if they are leaving the middle class for the upper class, right? Warren Buffet may pay a lower tax rate than his secretary does, but I think it highly likely that he still pays more dollars in taxes than all of the secretaries in his entire company combined, ignoring completely the other half of their payroll taxes that he pays, don't you? Is it worth the risk to drive Buffet and Berkshire Hathaway to the Bahamas to appropriate an additional 15% of his income for your purposes instead of his? Do you not think this will become an attractive scenario if Obama's expressed desire to take 30% of every dollar he makes over $1 Million instead of 15% becomes reality? Buffet doesn't have to operate his empire from one of the States that belong to this union of ours - he chooses to do so, at least for the time being. Under the right set of circumstances he could just as easily choose to follow James Cameron, Halliburton, Accenture, Ingersoll-Rand, Noble Drilling Services, Cooper Industries, Seagate Technology and others too numerous to mention, especially in the age of the global economy.

Obama says: Let’s level that playing field. “What we’re talking about under a balanced approach is asking Americans whose incomes have gone up the most over the last decade — millionaires and billionaires — to share in the sacrifice everyone else has to make.” Barack Obama, speech 2011

Whose playing field does he mean? You’ve got to remember—when Obama talks about those evil ‘millionaires and billionaires’ he is NOT talking about the Michael Moore’s, Sean Penn’s or Bill Maher’s of the world—he’s talking about AMERICAN BUSINESSES, such as oil company owners, private plane operators and hedge fund managers. Barack believes that people and/or businesses that have “too much money” have to give part of their money to people who don’t have as much as they do. The problems with this: How much is ‘too much’? What do they consider ‘rich’ and ‘poor’? And WHO decides these things?

Of course, James Cameron is Canadian...

Soulshiner wrote: Of course, James Cameron is Canadian...

And he came here to escape the oppressive Canadian tax system?

Atlas Shrugged? Some people here believe the book is a fable but here is evidence of it on national and state levels.

Soulshiner wrote: Of course, James Cameron is Canadian...

....who applied for, and received, status as a permanent resident of the United States.

Seems you left out, either intentionally or ignorantly, the last part.