There is a system whereby foreign banks are obligated to report accounts held by Americans to the US for “anti terrorism” purposes.
Could you give me a name, or at least some link to a government website that describes the system you're talking about?
Ok, but realistically, the people who would actually attempt tax evasion here wouldn't be susceptible to any of the above.
Let's assume a scenario where you have a dual citizen of the US and a South American country that has less than stellar relations with the US government.
Let's say they obtained their US citizenship by being born in the country during a temporary period of time that the parents resided there. The family decided to move back after a year or two, another 40 years passed, and the kid has grown to be a successful plastic surgeon who runs a self owned clinic and earns $200k income annually. Being aware of their dual citizenship they keep their wealth invested in entities with no US presence and never self-report anything to the IRS.
This is where I am not seeing any way for the IRS to enforce or do anything about this type of tax evasion.
He's eating the sections. He's eating the amendments. Of the people that live. There.
they could also check your bank balance and international holdings against the amount you said you’ve been making and see if it matches up.
Does the IRS have authority to issue such requests to foreign banks? How would the IRS even know what foreign bank to issue these requests to?
Sorry, I have no knowledge about what information is communicated across international borders with regards to the banking world and how this gets tracked on a per-individual basis.
Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean, but if someone works and lives abroad for 330 days of the year they'll likely have a bank account established within that country so that they don't have to deal with all of their daily financial activities being international transactions.
Hardly any web developers had the deep skill set needed to pull it off.
I'm personally of the opinion it's not so much an issue of a lack of talent that prevented graceful fallback from being adopted, but simply the amount of extra effort necessary to implement it properly.
In my opinion, to do it properly you can't make any assumptions about the browser your app is running on; you should never base anything on the reported user agent string. Instead, you need to test for each individual JavaScript, HTML, (or sometimes even CSS) feature and design the experience around having a fallback for when that one singular piece of functionality isn't present. Otherwise you create a brand new problem where, for example, a forked Firefox browser with a custom user agent string doesn't get recognized despite having the feature set to provide the full experience, and that person then gets screwed over.
But yeah, that approach is incredibly cumbersome and time consuming to code and test for. Even with libraries that help with properly detecting the capabilities of the browser, you'll still need to implement granular fallbacks that work for your particular application, and that's a lot of extra work.
Add to that the fact devs in this field are already burdened with having to support layouts and designs that must scale responsively to everything ranging from a phone screen to a 100" inch TV and it quickly becomes nearly impossible to actually finish any project on a realistic timeline. Doing it that way is a monumental task to undertake, and realistically it probably mainly benefits people that use NoScript or similar -- so not a lot of people.
If you were employed by a foreign company that has no presence in the US how exactly would the IRS know whether you've earning more than $125k?
Yeah, there should have been limits set on campaign costs, lobbying, media, etc. It's at a point where it doesn't seem like it's even possible to have a middle-class focused campaign that can openly say its basis is on taxing the fuck out of the top 1%.
But all I know is this: the second Trump term will make the standard of life in America far worse for most people. There will be hunger in 2028 for someone to simply say "We'll fix the middle class, and we'll make Musk, Bezos, etc pay for it". Hopefully by then what's left of twitter will not be as relevant as today, so that the message can at least have a hope of spreading through social media successfully.
No, the people that voted for Trump in this election will never vote for a non republican candidate regardless of how much you try to appease them. IMO you're more likely to lose even more voters than you stand to gain taking this approach. The democrats need to come up with a vision and candidate that is neither Harris, Biden, and certainly not anything close to Trump. They need someone that will make non-voters believe that there's a good chance their life will improve enough to make voting worthwhile.
This is what irritates me the most. I can live with Trump being president despite how much I disagree with the idiot's concepts. But this places him, as a very orange person, above the law that others have to abide by.
These are cases that were filed before his "president" status from the result of this election and before he even became a candidate in this election. For fuck sake, this should have stopped the whole ball from rolling.
No one is going to listen to your points if you come from a place of hatred.
72 million Trump voters embraced the hatred Trump spewed. Literally look at what you're saying and apply it to what happened the other day and decide yourself if you're wrong or right.
On J6 one piece of their trash was taken out and they all immediately ran. If anyone should be scared about what happened on that day it should be MAGA.