Announcement

Collapse

The GaijinPot Forum Is Closed

Please join us on our new Facebook Group.
See more
See less

Top

Collapse

Be wary of your investments -- the TAXMAN is watching

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by renkachan71 View Post
    No, actually it's in Europe. I just chose dollars for that one because I wasn't sure at the time where I would end up and wanted something I could 'carry around'. At the time I started it the dollar was strong and seemed like a 'universal currency'. I have that one in US dollars, plus investments in pounds (my main now - and I'm from the UK), Euros (quite small and new) and Australian dollars (small and long term - maybe 2 million yen but I can't touch it for 10 years). I have no investments in yen except my regular bank accounts.
    I don't have enough info but the chances are very good that your investment portfolio is not perfect for your situation (unbalanced risk/reward ratio, high costs etc.). If you told us more about those funds (name etc.) I might be able to tell you what you could do better.
    Having most of his money in just a few currencies although one is living in a different country for example might be a risky move. A decent accet allocation has to work on different levels (asset, currency, region etc.) and needs to be back-tested to estimate the real risk (max drawdown).

    Lots of people believe they are on the safe side because they choose one or two strong regions and currencies but don't realize that they have a potentional risk of 50 per cent/year, are running below benchmark with higher than average costs and with limited access (possibility to change). At the same time they are worrying about taxes although this is the least and cheapest problem compared to the things I mentioned above.
    Last edited by Tatsuo; 2012-09-15, 06:25 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by chainbolt View Post
      ...I don't think they need any reason. I think the NTA can audit anybody at their discretion any time. Individuals above a certain income threshold get anyway regularly audited. Other by random, but there is no specific reason necessary.
      Sure they can audit anyone but the odds of looking into an English teacher is small (given their income) unless something catches their attention.



      Originally posted by chainbolt View Post
      ...They can do exactly this based on mutual double taxation treaties, linked and discussed earlier in this thread. NTA and IRS for example seem to exchange such information on a regular basis.

      NTA and the IRS do not swap personal information as a matter of business practice.

      The information has to be requested.
      Last edited by Ken44; 2012-09-15, 05:23 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by minamon View Post
        What the Tax Office can do (based on a specific reason i.e. a bank transfer), is to request that a check be made as to how much, if any, a certain person has paid in tax in the UK (or another country with a tax agreement).
        It isn't this easy. Please see the actual cases reported in this thread (and believe me, I know what I am talking about), the case you mention is only one scenario: They have a specific reason such as they became aware of money transfer from and to abroad by a Japanese taxpayer and want to know what this money is supposed to do, respectively where it is from. The other case is that they audit you. The NTA can do this any time, they have the right (and even obligation) to audit a certain number of cases every year. Companies get audited normally every 5 years, high income individuals as well (there are articles by tax consultants outlining the frequency) and regular individuals on a random basis, or when they become aware of something suspicious. If they audit you, specialists will run through your Japanese accounts and ask you to disclose your accounts abroad and go through them line by line, day by day. These people know exactly what they are looking for, it's their daily job. Are you prepared for this? You may tell them that you do not have any account abroad, they won't believe you and start investigating.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tatsuo View Post
          and needs to be back-tested to estimate the real risk (max drawdown).
          What do you mean by "back tested"? Some sort of worst case modelling?

          but don't realize that they have a potentional risk of 50 per cent/year,
          Where does this risk spring from? A combination of stock market risk and exchange risk?

          We live in strange times to say the least at the moment. Low returns and relatively high risks. Personally, at the moment, I like fixed term bank deposits in a country with an AAA rating and government guarantees for bank deposits. I am cynical of the benefits of managed funds, especially those that offer flexibility in exchange for management fees upwards of 2% per annum. Buying shares in an index tracking trust is more than likely to provide whatever performance is available at low cost and as lopw as risk gets with shares. Anything to do with shares means playing the casino - that's really what people need to understand about risk. Even holding long term does not escape risk and long term is all very well-except in the long term we are all dead. Knowing when to get out of shares is more important than buying in. I don't have more than about 20% of my savings in shares in any case.

          I don't attempt to play exchange rates. That seems even more of a casino than shares. I just keep my investments in the two currencies that I can use or will use and don't worry about it. If I need to transfer money then I just get on with it and get on with life rather than trying to guess when I might get a better rate.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
            What do you mean by "back tested"? Some sort of worst case modelling?



            Where does this risk spring from? A combination of stock market risk and exchange risk?

            We live in strange times to say the least at the moment. Low returns and relatively high risks. Personally, at the moment, I like fixed term bank deposits in a country with an AAA rating and government guarantees for bank deposits. I am cynical of the benefits of managed funds, especially those that offer flexibility in exchange for management fees upwards of 2% per annum. Buying shares in an index tracking trust is more than likely to provide whatever performance is available at low cost and as lopw as risk gets with shares. Anything to do with shares means playing the casino - that's really what people need to understand about risk. Even holding long term does not escape risk and long term is all very well-except in the long term we are all dead. Knowing when to get out of shares is more important than buying in. I don't have more than about 20% of my savings in shares in any case.

            I don't attempt to play exchange rates. That seems even more of a casino than shares. I just keep my investments in the two currencies that I can use or will use and don't worry about it. If I need to transfer money then I just get on with it and get on with life rather than trying to guess when I might get a better rate.


            Of course you'll never know what can happen and I'm pretty sure nobody expected 2008 but you can take the last 30-50 years and see how asset classes actually can perform. This puts statements like "real estate is real value", "buy and hold is the way to go" and "cash is king" in a new perspective because they are all not true. There have been good years and terrible years for every asset class in the past and nobody (I really mean nobody could tell the previous year) and there is no reason whatsoever that this will change.

            So why bother guessing what is impossible to guess ?

            You you need to know your risk and need to know what to do when the stock markets takes a dive 50-60 per cent or a currency ( even the dollar) will go into hyperinflation. If you are prepared such things don't matter much.

            Even holding just cash or government bonds is a high risk. Most people don't realize it though.

            Paying 1.5-2.0 per cent a year to a fund manager that can't and won't beat the benchmark is crazy because you give them more than half of your money in the 30 years you are investing. Why?

            My advice is to build a cheap risk-portfolio consisting of several asset classes with different currencies and regions. You can build it on your own with ETF or index funds or if you don't like the hassle with rebalancing just buy a mixed index funds like:

            http://www.smtam.jp/fund/detail/_id_39/

            or

            http://maxis.muam.jp/e/fund/shouhin/251308.html



            Then you decide your risk by setting a fixed ratio of

            1) risk-portfolio
            2) risk-off asset (usually government bonds of the country you are living or bank deposits)

            This could be as simple as 50-50 or be 30-70 if you can't handle drawdowns.

            The only thing you need to do is to re-balance 1) and 2) once or twice a year.

            With this strategy you'll never have to worry about a drawdown as you will always be liquid to buy in a weak market and sell assets that performed well. You will always be invested around the globe in thousands of companies, dozens of countries and dozens of currencies at the same time. Even with 2008 the temporary draw-down was minimal and if you have kept the strategy with re-balancing you could have made a decent profit. You don't have to care anymore if currency x or y is safer or better and if funds A or B is going to beat the benchmark this year as it did last year (usually they don't).

            I say it again although people don't want to hear it. It is proven that

            1) beating the benchmark long-term is next to impossible
            2) market-timing is impossible
            3) successful asset-picking is impossible

            Although all data shows that the above stated is right, people are too arrogant to accept it and lose money.

            So, talking about taxes with portfolios that are too expensive and badly balanced is something I will never understand. People pay funds managers 50 to 60 per cent of their total assets for less than average performance and are happy with it but rack their brains about how to save some bucks with tax evasion.
            Last edited by Tatsuo; 2012-09-15, 09:01 AM.

            Comment


            • Renkachan 71,
              Note the title of this thread. If you were to transfer in $50,000 it would raise a red flag immediately and Citibank would be required to report that transfer. Whether or not you would be subject to future investigation is of course anyone's guess. So don't do it, please.

              For myself I think certain commodities are the best now because they are undervalued. How about potash, copper, uranium, and even oil? Ihave one among that list. Recently,however, I used the strong exchange rate to make some smaller purchases and repairs. It's not producing any income but it sure produced bargains!! Looking forward, I think the US dollar could be a good buy, but since I'm a Canadian, it's not a play for me. Also, I think that companies involved in construction would be good or related companies such as cement and lumber companies.

              My 2 cents worth.
              Last edited by Super Grover; 2012-09-15, 09:06 AM. Reason: Correct Siri's errors

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tatsuo View Post
                Of course you'll never know what can happen and I'm pretty sure nobody expected 2008 but you can take the last 30-50 years and see how asset classes actually can perform. This puts statements like "real estate is real value", "buy and hold is the way to go" and "cash is king" in a new perspective because they are all not true. There have been good years and terrible years for every asset class in the past and nobody (I really mean nobody could tell the previous year) and there is no reason whatsoever that this will change.

                So why bother guessing what is impossible to guess ?

                You you need to know your risk and need to know what to do when the stock markets takes a dive 50-60 per cent or a currency ( even the dollar) will go into hyperinflation. If you are prepared such things don't matter much.

                Even holding just cash or government bonds is a high risk. Most people don't realize it though.

                Paying 1.5-2.0 per cent a year to a fund manager that can't and won't beat the benchmark is crazy because you give them more than half of your money in the 30 years you are investing. Why?

                My advice is to build a cheap risk-portfolio consisting of several asset classes with different currencies and regions. You can build it on your own with ETF or index funds or if you don't like the hassle with rebalancing just buy a mixed index funds like:

                http://www.smtam.jp/fund/detail/_id_39/

                or

                http://maxis.muam.jp/e/fund/shouhin/251308.html



                Then you decide your risk by setting a fixed ratio of

                1) risk-portfolio
                2) risk-off asset (usually government bonds of the country you are living or bank deposits)

                This could be as simple as 50-50 or be 30-70 if you can't handle drawdowns.

                The only thing you need to do is to re-balance 1) and 2) once or twice a year.

                With this strategy you'll never have to worry about a drawdown as you will always be liquid to buy in a weak market and sell assets that performed well. You will always be invested around the globe in thousands of companies, dozens of countries and dozens of currencies at the same time. Even with 2008 the temporary draw-down was minimal and if you have kept the strategy with re-balancing you could have made a decent profit. You don't have to care anymore if currency x or y is safer or better and if funds A or B is going to beat the benchmark this year as it did last year (usually they don't).

                I say it again although people don't want to hear it. It is proven that

                1) beating the benchmark long-term is next to impossible
                2) market-timing is impossible
                3) successful asset-picking is impossible

                Although all data shows that the above stated is right, people are too arrogant to accept it and lose money.

                So, talking about taxes with portfolios that are too expensive and badly balanced is something I will never understand. People pay funds managers 50 to 60 per cent of their total assets for less than average performance and are happy with it but rack their brains about how to save some bucks with tax evasion.
                I agree with pretty much everything here especially the last 3 statements and your strategy is more or less the strategy I follow except I am less keen on spreading investments over many currencies and many markets. Perhaps I should look at that but it is noticeable that when one goes up or down they all do. I tend to think as well that getting involved in certain markets and currencies is a recipe for more risk and volatility not less. Plus it all costs money. There are always management fees plus the spread between offer and bid prices. At the moment I am still in a very cautious mood so have sold off quite a few "expertly" managed funds of funds so my holdings of anything to do with managed funds has been reduced to about 20%.@It depends as well on your age. If you are young then you can afford "drawdowns" and "haircuts" but as you get older you need to far more careful to avoid them. By the way, you have to give the financial services industry credit for being very inventive in creating euphemisms for "losses".



                Even holding just cash or government bonds is a high risk. Most people don't realize it though.
                I take issue here a little bit. There is no such thing as zero risk - especially knowing what we know now. There is though, such a thing as low and even very low risk so I do not agree that all holdings of cash (assuming you don't really mean cash but bank deposits) or purchases of government or even corporate bonds are high risk. I'd be interested in your views on government bonds - Japanese and others. To me, it seems Japan is a very unattractive proposition at the moment. Tiny tiny returns, hidden or not fully understood risks and a stock market that appears to be defying gravity given the dreadful performance of leading Japanese companies of late. Long term prospects are always impossible to forecast but on the face of it ......

                Finally, and perhaps coming back onto topic, I agree with you regarding tax. Concentrate on making secure returns and don't worry about being lucky enough to pay tax. Really, think about it, a tax bill is a certain sign that you are doing something right. I sometimes think that the best investment advisors would be people working in the tax offices. They really know what is making money and what isn't.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
                  I am less keen on spreading investments over many currencies and many markets. Perhaps I should look at that but it is noticeable that when one goes up or down they all do.
                  In short term time frames it looks like it. Japanese markets react to US markets etc.
                  Even FX seems to follow the stock market.

                  But in long term time frames and taking one year at a time the situation is different. If you compare the Nikkei with American stocks or European stocks you can see a huge difference. Japanese stocks performed a lot worse in a long-term time frame. In some years Japanese stocks performed a lot better. As you can't predict if the US will continue its leadership and if yes for how long, you need to be invested in all regions.

                  The same goes for emerging markets. You need to invest a part of you assets there but have to be careful. As you could see in China the last years "economic growth and future expectations of the media" don't have to go hand in hand with increasing stock prices all the time. Now we know the best time for leaving the BRICS was when the emerging market boom was on its highest. As I don't know what the future brings I have 15 per cent of my assets in stocks and bonds of companies and countries in the Emerging Markets. Even if growth there will go back where it was I'll not change this ratio because I know that there is a big difference between growth of the economy of a country and companies earning money / creating value for shareholders.

                  Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
                  I do not agree that all holdings of cash (assuming you don't really mean cash but bank deposits) or purchases of government or even corporate bonds are high risk.
                  If you are like most people and have more than 90 per cent of your liquid assets in cash or government bonds (may be even of one country) you have the risk of inflation, a currency risk ( even if it is just indirect due to increasing prices of imported products) and the risk of the country (Argentina, Greece etc.). Don't get me wrong: You need cash, deposits and government bonds as they are the non-risk-factor in your asset allocation No. 2. Actually my used phrase "non-risk" is incorrect. I should use "low-risk". But this assets are only low risk if you hold other assets at the same time. In case of a heavy drawdown, other assets in other currencies will automatically increase.

                  Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
                  it seems Japan is a very unattractive proposition at the moment.
                  Aging population, highest debts, no resources.... But this was true 5 years ago and still Japanese bonds were one of the best performing assets class in the last 5 years. I'm not saying that people should invest now but that it is very difficult to predict the future with given info.

                  Of course Japan has a lot of debts. But you can also say that almost all of it is being held by Japanese people and as Japan can print its own money, can change the tax law and is independent when it comes to money compared to almost all other countries the situation is not much worse than in the US. I'm not saying that Japan has a bright future as the problems are obvious but I don't believe we know what will happen and if it's only for this reason you need to be invested partly in Japan.

                  You have to play in scenarios. What could happen ? Let's say Japanese government bonds actually lost in value and interest rate increased. We'd see the Yen losing value like there were no tomorrow. This would give export oriented companies a boost in earnings. As most companies are export oriented ,Japanese stock would increase in value etc.

                  There are scenarios that say, older Japanese people, that are holding billions in savings, will start spending/people that inherit the money will start spending and this will lead to a new boom in Japan. Of course this is unlikely and seeing the situation at the moment nobody could imagine such things. But if you told someone 20 years ago that L. Brothers will go bankrupt, you could buy a dollar for less than 80 yen and we had a black American president they'd called you crazy.

                  What I want to say:
                  Even with the best analysis of given information you can never predict what will happen and as the past shows can not even come close with a prediction. Therefore you need to focus on the two things you can control when you invest: costs and diversification. Everything else is just wishful thinking based on the seemingly endless arrogance of human beings that have the tendency to overrate their abilities and the strong belief they could control what is not controllable.
                  Last edited by Tatsuo; 2012-09-15, 01:21 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Ken44 View Post
                    Sure they can audit anyone but the odds of looking into an English teacher is small (given their income) unless something catches their attention.
                    About this we agree. In such a "small earner case" it's probably more bad luck or the taxpayer's own "carelessness" that is drawing their attention to a tax dodger. But the problem is no one knows where they draw the line, is it an annual income of 5 MJPY, 10 MJPY, 15 MJPY? And what sort of "incident" could attract their attention to audit even a small income earner? Is it the absence of any reported income abroad, is it (as somebody here who got audited speculated) a claimed tax refund, or claimed medical expenses, or a claimed tax refund for a housing loan? Nobody knows. And once they are at you, they go back 5 years, claim the original tax + interest + delinquent tax. An originally small amount might easily become a big one this way.

                    Yes, they do need a reason.
                    If you are so sure about this, you certainly can back this up with a credible source?

                    NTA and the IRS do not swap personal information as a matter of business practice.
                    Again, how would you know this? The taxation treaty between the US and Japan does allow to do it, we have linked, studied, and discussed the text in this thread. And even if they don't do it now, or not regularly, given the increasing cooperation between the national tax authorities under the guidance of the OECD and the increasing easiness of centralized data collection and exchange, how can you exclude the possibility that they would not do this any time soon? The legal basis is given.

                    I have said so before: For a permanent tax resident (anybody staying longer than 5 years) who has the intention to leave the country sooner or later, the NTA does not matter. In the worst case, you cut and run. Anybody else, people who are married here, long term residents, people who want to retire here, you better come clean. Sooner or later they will get you. It's like a ticking bomb, and with every year of tax evading the potential damage is becoming bigger.
                    Last edited by chainbolt; 2012-09-15, 05:28 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by chainbolt View Post
                      About this we agree. In such a "small earner case" it's probably more bad luck or the taxpayer's own "carelessness" that is drawing their attention to a tax dodger. But the problem is no one knows where they draw the line...
                      Right but NTA agents (like the IRS) do not have unlimited manpower and likely base their decisons on who to audit by the amount of earned income and items which catch their attention.

                      Someone earning under say 10 million yen and no transactions of interest really has little to fear.



                      Originally posted by chainbolt View Post
                      ...If you are so sure about this, you certainly can back this up with a credible source?
                      I was referring to NTA wanting to request info from the IRS on a US citizen. Yes, they a reason and to submit a request.



                      Originally posted by chainbolt View Post
                      ...Again, how would you know this?
                      Because I spoke with the IRS and they made it clear they DO NOT supply personal tax information to a foreign agency as a matter of business practice. There needs to be a request along with a specific reason for such info. The treaty simply means Japan and the US agree to exchange info. should it become necessary.
                      Last edited by Ken44; 2012-09-16, 10:21 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Yep, Super Grover's done a great job reminding gaijin of what our responsibilities are unfair tho they can be.

                        My position always has been re Japan - in my home country a 'permanent resident' is legally and technically that. Somebody who Oz has awarded a certain legal status and so they have all the benefits of permanent residency as well as the responsibilities. Japan is completely a hatfull of arzeholes when it comes to asserting that gaijin are 'permanent resident'.

                        In first world countries, permanent residency is a legal status and gives rights. In Japan it means any poor bas-tard who is living for five years or more in Japan, renewing permission to stay that has nothing to do with real permanent residency. Japan is just doing that to bestow minimal status on the gaijin yet reap all the benefits of subjecting the faux permanent resident gaijin to permanent resident taxes.

                        It surprises me that many here and elsewhere have never picked up on that immense hypocrisy. Yeah and this hypocrisy institutionalised means in theory you do have to declare everything that is earning income and interest-bearing. Whether in your home country or Japan. My first time in Japan was over 5 years and when I prepared before for their tax grab. I have a good accountant/biz lawyer in Oz.

                        You should always think ahead and explore legal options such as putting investments, accounts etc in family members' names. These ways of doing things are not illegal - you have to get the correct advice from professionals.

                        Regarding houses/apartments/flats - the home I have in North Melbourne has not been listed as mine because it is not mine fully yet - it's understood I'm the half owner with my uncle but he is legally the owner and when he decides to move from it (which will happen when I go back to Oz permanently) then legally I will do all the necesssary paperwork, filing etc to become the owner.

                        For those of you who have bank accounts/investments that you have left no paper trail for re sending money to them from Japan or vice versa - I'd say you're still safe keeping them incognito if they're abroad. You already pay tax wherever they are located. The Japan position is hypocritical. But yes, for everything that there is a link to and for which you have been doing things openly, you need to declare it.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Ken44 View Post
                          Right but NTA agents (like the IRS) do not have unlimited manpower and likely base their decisons on who to audit by the amount of earned income and items which catch their attention.

                          Someone earning under say 10 million yen and no transactions of interest really has little to fear.





                          I was referring to NTA wanting to request info from the IRS on a US citizen. Yes, they a reason and to submit a request.





                          Because I spoke with the IRS and they made it clear they DO NOT supply personal tax information to a foreign agency as a matter of business practice. There needs to be a request along with a specific reason for such info. The treaty simply means Japan and the US agree to exchange info. should it become necessary.

                          From my audit experience, the NTA knew which trading houses I had been trading through and had exact details of the taxes I had paid in the US. So I don't think it's difficult for them to obtain details.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by manoman View Post
                            From my audit experience, the NTA knew which trading houses I had been trading through and had exact details of the taxes I had paid in the US. So I don't think it's difficult for them to obtain details.
                            Yes, but NTA had a reason for auditing you didn`t they? You werenft randomly chosen.

                            My point isn`t that NTA can`t obtain such information but that a request needs to be filed.

                            And NTA isn`t going to file such a request unless something catches their attention.
                            Last edited by Ken44; 2012-09-16, 11:24 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by caramellocap View Post
                              In first world countries, permanent residency is a legal status and gives rights. In Japan it means any poor bas-tard who is living for five years or more in Japan, renewing permission to stay that has nothing to do with real permanent residency. Japan is just doing that to bestow minimal status on the gaijin yet reap all the benefits of subjecting the faux permanent resident gaijin to permanent resident taxes.

                              It surprises me that many here and elsewhere have never picked up on that immense hypocrisy. .
                              I certainly don't disagree with the caustic spirit of what you're saying, but what surprises me is how many people consider it both unfair, and hypocrisy.

                              This is based on my own experiences with highly educated Japanese, some of them government officials.

                              A truly disturbing number of them honestly believe we are economic vultures, or a new version of the Meiji era Oyatoi Gaijin (highly paid invited expert consultants).

                              In that sense, it isn't hypocrisy; it's sincere, and remarkably bigoted, and completely mercantilist. Allowing, of course, that bigotry and mercantilism are hypocritical at their fundament.

                              My own tax free status used to drive them to apoplexy, even though it was their own government that conferred that. Even my voluntary payments of health insurance and resident tax did little to assuage their self-righteous anger.

                              It wasn't so much that I didn't pay income tax that got them, it was that I enjoyed a status they did not. It's the old Japanese Fairness canard (i.e. "it's only fair if I benefit at somebody else's expense"). Needless to say, I was laughing my bag off inwardly at their shameless self-interest and bigotry.

                              If anything, I found my Normal Japanese friends to be far more sympathetic about the tax situation longer term non-PR holders face. And a lot of those guys are card carrying rednecks, in both tax terms, and other terms.

                              As for the unfairness of it, in the abstract sense you are speaking of, I agree, and while I fully sympathise with Soop Grover, I remain unconvinced that the application of the standing laws is unfair in a narrow legal sense.

                              He earns his money in Japan, and it seems to me decided he shouldn't be paying taxes on the parts of that he shipped abroad. That's tax evasion in any advanced state I know of.


                              Having said that, my understanding of the details of his case might be mistaken, and I do sincerely wish they hadn't cottoned onto what he was doing.


                              And he does do a Sooper job of outlining the situation.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by kurogane View Post
                                I certainly don't disagree with the caustic spirit of what you're saying, but what surprises me is how many people consider it both unfair, and hypocrisy.

                                This is based on my own experiences with highly educated Japanese, some of them government officials.

                                A truly disturbing number of them honestly believe we are economic vultures, or a new version of the Meiji era Oyatoi Gaijin (highly paid invited expert consultants).

                                In that sense, it isn't hypocrisy; it's sincere, and remarkably bigoted, and completely mercantilist. Allowing, of course, that bigotry and mercantilism are hypocritical at their fundament.

                                My own tax free status used to drive them to apoplexy, even though it was their own government that conferred that. Even my voluntary payments of health insurance and resident tax did little to assuage their self-righteous anger.

                                It wasn't so much that I didn't pay income tax that got them, it was that I enjoyed a status they did not. It's the old Japanese Fairness canard (i.e. "it's only fair if I benefit at somebody else's expense"). Needless to say, I was laughing my bag off inwardly at their shameless self-interest and bigotry.

                                If anything, I found my Normal Japanese friends to be far more sympathetic about the tax situation longer term non-PR holders face. And a lot of those guys are card carrying rednecks, in both tax terms, and other terms.

                                As for the unfairness of it, in the abstract sense you are speaking of, I agree, and while I fully sympathise with Soop Grover, I remain unconvinced that the application of the standing laws is unfair in a narrow legal sense.

                                He earns his money in Japan, and it seems to me decided he shouldn't be paying taxes on the parts of that he shipped abroad. That's tax evasion in any advanced state I know of.


                                Having said that, my understanding of the details of his case might be mistaken, and I do sincerely wish they hadn't cottoned onto what he was doing.


                                And he does do a Sooper job of outlining the situation.
                                Please read or reread the applicable parts of this thread. I paid taxes in Canada. There is a treaty. I thought I was okay. I did not know about the 5- year rule.many others didn't or don't. I found that there was and is a system in place here to nail people much later in order to get the max amt of penalties from us instead of of informing us after a year or at most 2. Other countries tax agencies do NOT do this. So I thought this was insidious and thus this thread was born to warn others. I never knowingly did anything illegal. Pls do not use loaded verbs like cotton on.
                                Last edited by Super Grover; 2012-09-17, 12:03 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X