Republicans Want to Save the Tax Havens!

Republicans want to protect tax havens for billionaires. They don't want the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act to go into effect later this year. The FATCA is an agreement with banking officials in Switzerland, the U.S., and the Cayman Islands aimed at fighting international tax evasion. While the vast majority of Americans support making it more difficult for billionaires to stash money overseas, the Republican National Committee actually wants to “complicate or delay implementation” of the FATCA.

In a recent interview with Reuters, RNC member Solomon Yue said he is proposing a repeal of the FATCA as a new plank for the 2014 Republican Party Platform – and it clearly shows who that party really represents: billionaires. These overseas tax havens cost our nation about $300 billion dollars every year – enough to cover the cost of the entire food stamps budget, long-term unemployment insurance, reversing all of the sequester cuts to date, and still have about $100 billion dollars left over.

Republicans think that pleasing the billionaires who fund their campaigns is way more important than making sure that Americans aren't going hungry or ending up on the street. Their blatant efforts to protect tax havens should eliminate any doubt that Americans had about who the Republicans really work for. Now it's time to elect lawmakers who work for the rest of us.


Dweinstein003's picture
Dweinstein003 9 years 8 weeks ago

FACTA was a result of the UBS scandal. Oh, the US became an oligarchy in 2008. I think it's a Republican/Democratic party issue who are both controlled by the billionaires.

ckrob's picture
ckrob 9 years 8 weeks ago

Off topic:

The Presidential Commission on Election Administration report, issued yesterday, makes no mention of the problem with recounting machine voting results. One can only reprint the vote tallies which are subject to alteration by officials or by hacking. I had hoped for better. Paper ballots were good enough when I voted as a baby; it ought to be good enough now.

Global's picture
Global 9 years 8 weeks ago

Be very suspicious when Thom quotes numbers and facts that come from the propaganda machine that is Think Progress. There is way more to this than just creating another wedge issue to demonize Rand Paul, Mike Lee and others.

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 8 weeks ago

As far as electing law makers who work for the rest of us goes, good luck on getting politicians from either side of the political isle to exclusively work for us. Having said that, FACTA was voted into law on Mar. 18 2010, by the Democrats when they held the Senate and House. So it seems the Democrats do tend to favor laws that are good for all of us and not just the wealthy and the corporations. In any event, we all know the Dem.'s will continue to vote for their candidates and the Repub.'s will continue to do the same. From my prospective this law does a good job in preventing people from hiding profit income in foreign banks and institutions primarily by imposing a tax on any foreign financial institution that does not comply with this new law. The law does the following; (copied from the wpc website.) FATCA, which was enacted as part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act of 2010, requires financial institutions to use enhanced due diligence procedures to identify US persons who have invested in either non-US financial accounts or non-US entities. The intent behind FATCA is to keep US persons from hiding income and assets overseas.

A foreign financial institution (FFI) could face significant consequences if it fails to enter into an agreement with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which is merely the first step; the ability to align all the key stakeholders, including operations, technology, risk, legal, and tax, will be paramount to successfully comply with FATCA. The institution would be subject to a 30% withholding tax on any “withholdable payment” made to its proprietary account for failing to comply with FATCA.

This appears to be a good law and I have yet to read anything that provides a logical reason why this law should be repealed. But I am without doubt that a Republican will come up with some type of reasoning that claims this law will hurt our economy or the wealthy/corporations will move to another country with less tax regulations. If anyone believes this, please give a reference where you viewed such information, so we can all read it. To me this law is a win/win for America. It will make tax cheaters pay their legal share of taxes and it could help stave off the cutting of domestic programs that help people in the middle class and the lower class on the income scale. K.W.

Global's picture
Global 9 years 8 weeks ago

Ken, just go to and read the issues.

Elioflight's picture
Elioflight 9 years 8 weeks ago

My husband thinks we should invade those countries/tax havens and get back the money that belongs to OUR ECONOMY. That money does NOT BELONG to those unpatriotic greedy creeps; it belongs to the American people who MADE that money, not to the few who TOOK the money and are hiding it "under the mattress."

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 9 years 8 weeks ago

Reply to #1: "Their blatant efforts to protect tax havens should eliminate any doubt that Americans had about who the Republicans really work for." ........You would think?????

Another way to frame this.

Do you as a voter in the upcoming midterms desire the following roadmap to economic recovery?

Protect billionaires ability to evade taxation by delay of FATCA.

Move Medicare toward private for profit insurance companies by giving people a set amount to buy their own plans.

Implement 700 billion more in Medicare cuts.

Divert payroll taxes to Wall Street for privatization of Social Security.

Continue tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas.

Continue to block all legislation related to job stimulus.

No minimum wage hike and no extension of long term unemployment insurance and more cuts to food stamp program.

End Affordable Health Insurance Act and guarantee U.S. citizens continue to pay twice the rate the rest of the world pays.

Deregulate/end environmental standards to speed up the destruction of Texas first, and eventually the remainder of the planet.

Cut Social Security by looting the fund in order to pay off Fascist Wars for profit debt.

If you desire this......Paul Ryan/Tea Party roadmap to hell.. ...then by all means vote Teapublican in the upcoming midterms.

You may also ask...why in hell would anybody with a sound mind vote republican?...Turn on FOX , tune out reality, deny truth, and just sit there and eat donuts.

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 8 weeks ago

Global -- Is that all you can come up with -- read somebody else's thoughts? Do you have any thoughts of your own?

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 8 weeks ago

2950 - 10K -- You forgot to mention one of the main propaganda babblings of the right. They keep calling investing, spending, and then come up with examples of wasteful government spending. Austerity never works. Actually, austerity does work to slow down an economy. Slowing down the economy makes Obama look bad. If the republicans were to take over our government they would spend like "drunken sailors" like they always do.

michaelmoore052's picture
michaelmoore052 9 years 8 weeks ago

It's a b tch to get republicans to see to reason. I work at it day in/out. Several people I know, incl my Bro, absolutely hate Democrats. So I've taken a tact that shows them how much of their earned income is squandered by the heartless rich. None of these people are rich but they like to hoard money anyway. They think that they're "voting their wallet" but in reality they're being scammed by monied interests who don't give a damn who gets hurt. And they'll turn around and do it again and again. They're gamblers without a clue.

Give them a clue.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 9 years 8 weeks ago

chuckle8.....Hell, I could go on forever .....they, the Repuplicans, always spend like drunken Frat Boys on war for profit, I'll give you that. I'm still wondering where that missing pallet of 18 billion in cold cash from the last oil war ended up. I've got some theories. Snowden knows where!

Carl Young 9 years 8 weeks ago

So, why don't you elaborate? What "more" (facts, I mean) would you have people consider? By the way, Rand Paul, et al require no assistance to maintain their demonic status.

ken ware's picture
ken ware 9 years 8 weeks ago

Global - I have read all the points on the website you directed me too and not one argument makes any sense. How is this law violating our Constitutional rights? I have not read anything in the Constitution where it mentions that you have the right to store your profits in off shore accounts to avoid paying you legal taxes. Punishing Americans who work abroad, etc. etc..Come on, these are same none factual arguments I expexted from Republican politicians. The best part is where they same it is only $1 billion in unpaid taxes. How did they come up with that amount? Threatening job loss and violating trade agreements are the exact type of arguing points I said they would come up with! I respect your right to disagree with me, but if you read what the FACTA law actually does, none of these arguments the Republicans claim are valid. Basically all it entails is forcing financial entities to provide info on off shore accounts so they can be reviewed and if they are not paying their taxes they will be subject to the rules and regulations of our tax codes. Any financial institutions trying to hide these accounts will be subject to tax penalties on accounts in the U.S... Do you have a better idea to collect unpaid taxes from people who are trying to avoid their legal taxes and hide their money off shore? I am exhausted so I will have to wait to make any further comments on this subject. K.W.

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 8 weeks ago

KW -- Thank you for reading that reference referred to by global.

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 8 weeks ago

2950-10K -- you have to give me more than just war spending. 18 billion -- that is like worrying about trimming your fingernails when you are dieing from cancer. 84% of the 10 trillion dollars (AKA 10,000 billion) that dubya left us with was run up by repugs.

anarchist cop out's picture
anarchist cop out 9 years 8 weeks ago

It's all about status and class insecurity fomented by the Republican PR machine in the Maoist styled (but right wing) Cultural Revolution that was meant to undo the Depression Era egalitarian ethos of the Great Depression and the '60s that supported the New Deal and the Democrats. They're not voting their wallets but their great status insecurity, and thus, their status symbol climbing causes them to hate egalitarianism.

anarchist cop out's picture
anarchist cop out 9 years 8 weeks ago

You voted as a baby? I thought you had to be 18.

You're right, though, weird conspiracy of silence.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 9 years 8 weeks ago

chuckle8: I'm not sure what you want from me.....I'm more than well aware of the out of control spending by Republicans, as well as the tax cuts for the rich problem. Why isn't more being said about the countless revenue being lost over time as a result of massive tax cuts for those who didn't need them?

As for that missing money you aren't worried about...let me just comment this way..... What if it's in the hands of some very dangerous people? ....18 billion!

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 8 weeks ago

2950-10K -- I just wanted to emphasize that even if the spending was reasonable, the repugs would still be applying full throttle to Jude Wanniski's two santa claus theory.

The other "more" I want from you and I think everyone else on this blog is a recognition that cutting the deficit as Obama is doing is perilous to the economy. As my favorite saying goes (I am the only one saying it), increase the deficit, lower the debt. Of course, the debt I am talking about is the percentage of GDP one. Additionally, if one sings the praises of the reduction in deficit, the repugs will take credit for it by saying it was their sequester and their refusing to pass any of Obama's job bills etc. Although the cause may be subjective, Ravi Batra has pointed out the facts are whenever the deficit is made small the market crashes (a leading indicator of the economy in peril). For example, when Clinton reduced the deficit to near zero the DOW fell precipitously in 2000. Of couse, dubya jumped on and destroyed the economy. We will never know if the economy could have recovered from Clinton balancing the budget.

(The following bold type was the hitting of some key accidentally. I do not know how to get rid of it) Looking at revenue being lost over time, IMO, is looking at the wrong thing. IMO, the thing to look at is the building of the US economic machine. A prime example of looking at revenue as misplaced is the fact that when Reagan cut the top tax rate (78% to 35% or was it 75% to 38% or something similar) the tax revenue provided by top earners increased 200 to 300%. This was followed by the greatest recession since the Great Republican Depression. Even when JFK (actually LBJ executed JFK's idea) lowered the top rate from 92% to 78(5?) the economy was slowed. JFK said he was making the tax cuts revenue neutral by eliminating some loopholes. I am guessing those loopholes forced high earners to invest in the US economic machine.

I would like very much to find out what happened to that $18 billion. Maybe we could finally put some members of the dubya administration in jail.

SHFabian's picture
SHFabian 9 years 8 weeks ago

I'm not sure if corporations reflect society or the other way around. How would the average person answer this: Reality: Not everyone can work, due to health or circumstances, and there simply aren't jobs available to all who need one. They - our surplus population - don't disappear. What should we do about them?

SHFabian's picture
SHFabian 9 years 8 weeks ago

I think the reason the middle class isn't outraged at the massive chunk of the budget that is redistributed to the few at the top is that they are so obsessed with the fear that a crumb might trickle down to the undeserving poor (we do believe in helping the deserving poor, but also decided that no one who is poor is deserving).

SHFabian's picture
SHFabian 9 years 8 weeks ago

Sort of. Newt Gingrich recognized, and lectured about, a problem that plagued our elite throughout the 20th century. Every time the richest few achieved a certain level of wealth and power, the poor and middle class "masses" united to push back, to everyone's benefit. By the 1980s "Reagan Revolution," it was understood that it would be necessary to divide the masses, pitting the middle class against the poor, to prevent a united push-back this time. It was a stunning success. Even media marketed to liberals is powerfully used to keep the "masses" divided by often reciting typical right-wing/corporatist talking points and phrases, especially on socioeconomic issues. For example, they pander relentless to the middle class (incomes roughly in the $50k range), and have written the masses of truly poor out of the public discussion. Democrats no longer talk about standing up for "ordinary Americans, " but ONLY for those still in the middle class. This time, the "masses" were divided and conquered.

David.G's picture
David.G 9 years 8 weeks ago

Both sides of the isle are guilty of protecting the rich in any way that they can. Most of congress are millionaires themselves, and the majority of those are Democrats. I am sure people on both sides use those tax havens.

  • These slot games can keep me playing for hours on end, because if one game at that new casino online begins to get on my nerves there are others to check out.

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 9 years 8 weeks ago

SHFabian -- This reply is with respect to the not enough jobs and what to do about it. My answer which I have said many times before on Thom's blogs. is vote democratic. The reason I give for this is that if we would have had 61 dem senators in the 2009-2010 congress, card check would have passed. With card check we would have stronger labor unions. With stronger labor unions we would have higher tariffs, and more importantly, with labor unions we would have shorter work weeks. It seems with an overabundance of dems in both houses we could solve the shortage of jobs problem, Unfortunately, I do see how it would help the discrimination against the poor.

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From Screwed:
"The powers that be are running roughshod over the powers that OUGHT to be. Hartmann tells us what went wrong — and what you and I can do to help set American right again."
Jim Hightower, National Radio Commentator, Writer, Public Speaker, and author of the bestselling Thieves in High Places
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"In an age rife with media-inspired confusion and political cowardice, we yearn for a decent, caring, deeply human soul whose grasp of the problems confronting us provides a light by which we can make our way through the quagmire of lies, distortions, pandering, and hollow self-puffery that strips the American Dream of its promise. How lucky we are, then, to have access to the wit, wisdom, and willingness of Thom Hartmann, who shares with us here that very light, grown out of his own life experience."
Mike Farrell, actor, political activist, and author of Just Call Me Mike and Of Mule and Man
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Right through the worst of the Bush years and into the present, Thom Hartmann has been one of the very few voices constantly willing to tell the truth. Rank him up there with Jon Stewart, Bill Moyers, and Paul Krugman for having the sheer persistent courage of his convictions."
Bill McKibben, author of Eaarth