The $100k you're referring to is the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion [1]. If you're an American working abroad, you don't need to pay income tax on your first $107,600. The exclusion does not apply to self-employment tax or investment income.
That's not even the real problem, though. The problem is that banks don't want to deal with the FATCA compliance issues and just refuse to deal with Americans, period. I've experienced this firsthand as an American expat and it is a colossal pain in the ass.
I was affiliated with a company in Singapore which had it's bank account closed, I believe due to FACTA, even though at the time no one involved with the company had ever been to the US and didn't have any ties to the US. It was simply that the size of the account was too small to justify the associated administrative burden. FACTA has impact beyond US citizens - pretty annoying.
I work in finance and it IS a colossal pain to deal with the FATCA compliance.
There is no official guidance to FATCA and its processes, and every country has passed its own FATCA related regulations. Therefore running a FATCA compliant entity in say france requires you to comply with all french laws around fatca. Which also leads to issues with GDPR. This creates a cost of several hundred thousand USD per year just to deal with US clients for most western finance companies, per country they do business in.
Or - simply flatly refuse to offer services to any US citizens and rest easy knowing the IRS isn't going to ruin your life just because a US citizen tried to open an account without even depositing a single cent, but you didn't file your IRS stuff correctly
If you're in a country like Malaysia, the domestic branch of a multi-national bank may not accept US citizens, because the Malaysian branch doesn't deal with FATCA/US gov.
No. If you earn more than the allowable amount for the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE), you claim the Foreign Tax Credit instead. Under the FTC, you essentially pay the higher of the two tax rates. Except the accounting can get tricky if you have multiple sources of income that are taxed at different rates between the US and the foreign country.
For example, if you earn 200k in a foreign country and that country charges you 75k on 190k of that, and decides that 10k doesn't count for some reason. Suppose the US rates are such that you owe 60k on 190k, then the FTC erases that 60k. But you might still owe 3k on the remaining 10k that the foreign country ignored.
I thought about this but its all about balance, money spent in your 20s and 30s is more valuable than in your 40s. That doesn't mean don't save at all just be balanced with a slight tilt towards saving more.
Most of the people doing FIRE are not the types who spend money on expensive stuff. If they were, they’d be doing fat FIRE (uncommon). Most people doing FIRE do not have high standards of living. If they did, it’d run somewhat counter to FIRE. The people who can do fat fire are just lucky and got rich and should be ignored promptly.
There is also the problem that many bought real estate far before it was as fiendishly expensive as it is now, bought stocks and were part of companies during wild bull runs, and act like you can reproduce their success trivially. (You can’t)
Also, I think of spending in your youth as an investment in memories. What is the point of getting all your best trips in at 65 (just before dementia sets in) when you have at best 30 years to enjoy them. If you did the trips when you’re 30, you’d have decades more to enjoy them and could actually go on them. Living for when you’re senile is a scam.
The parent comment is a bit flip and sarcastic, but he's not wrong. $550k isn't even a speed bump for Twitter. SV tech companies aren't going to take EU regulatory bodies seriously unless they pass out meaningful fines.
Hopefully, Ireland’s Data Protection Commission intends this to be a "shot across the bow" hinting at more severe fines if Twitter continues to do this kind of thing. Otherwise, Twitter is unlikely to change their behavior.
I would be surprised if any US company would have had the foresight to call European authorities within 3 days of a serious issue in 2018 .. especially with whatever skeleton crews are working over Christmas.
It's been a learning curve, and things like this have been good lessons to bring us to where we are.
... and the fourth time I've rolled my eyes at the idea international day trips by air were "integral to his being" or whatever the exact wording of that legal stretch-of-the-imagination was.
Yeah it’s hard to sympathize with someone whose “entire persona was shifted by this event”. He abused the service and they found reason to terminate the contract, or sucks but if he didn’t ghost ticket or abuse the companion rule they would have had no recourse.
People attach a lot of self-worth and self-identity to aspects of their behavior. For some it’s where they go hiking, or where they live, or a hobby. It’s not hard at all for me to imagine that someone attached themselves to this idea.
Not knowing anything about philosophy, I started reading Nietzsche. I really couldn't even understand what he was talking about. After beating my head against it for some time, I reached out to an acquaintance who was a philosophy instructor at a university and told him about my experience.
"Try reading Hume," he advised me.
So, I read Hume, and I enjoyed it.
Last summer, I was visiting Edinburgh, Scotland for the first time. I've always had a fascination with cemeteries: how the stones were carved, how old the people were, how long they lived, how long did their widows outlive them, etc. In this particular cemetery in Edinburgh, I came across the tomb of David Hume. It was completely unexpected: I was vaguely aware he was Scottish, but I didn't expect to find his tomb. I took a picture and excitedly sent to all my friends. "Hey, I found the tomb of David Hume!"
I guess my comment is a bit tangential to the article. Like the article author, I found Hume interesting and accessible. I still don't understand Nietzsche.
You're absolutely right: it's a massive transfer of wealth from the young, productive class to older people and to commercial landlords. But it can't be changed: it's the "third rail" of California tax policy.
I left California for Nevada many years ago, and I subsequently sold stock I accumulated while in California without paying state income tax.
It is legal and you can do it, but there are a lot of legal hurdles. They're pretty well documented around page 5 of FTB 1031 [1].
In my case, I quit my W2 job in California, entered into a contract to lease a home in NV, got rid of all leased or owned real estate in CA, sold or re-titled all motor vehicles from CA, registered to vote in NV, surrendered my CA driver license for a new NV license, re-titled all my financial accounts at my new address, got a NV phone number, etc.
This was all easy because I was single without children. If my situation was more complicated, like I had a spouse or ex-spouse with children enrolled in CA schools, or decided to retain owned real estate in CA, the situation can quickly fall into a gray zone.
If you have a W2 job in CA while claiming you're in NV, it's very hard to escape the CA FTB.
CA is very aggressive about chasing down its former residents. It's important to check all the boxes to get them from chasing you.
After I left, I filed non-resident CA returns for three years basically saying, "I had income but I am not a resident and it was not from a CA source, therefore I owe no CA tax." This is important because it starts the statute of limitations running. If you don't file, the statute of limitations doesn't start.
And while I'm writing all this: what in the world is up with a 13.3% state tax bracket? Screw California.
Those high brackets really only apply to people that are making a lot of money. I make $100k right now and my state tax in California would be nearly the same as it is in Ohio at that rate. That being said, with my work being remote indefinitely I’m going to Texas to save over $400 a month in tax (and cost of living is about the same — very low).
I guess your case was extra special. I remained employed by the same company after moving from CA to AZ and the FTB never bothered me. The year I relocated, I filed my.. 540? after determining what income I earned while living in CA. And that was that. No issues with my options or RSUs either. Being married and having a child was also a non-issue.
If you're married or have children AND they come with you to AZ, that's obviously no problem. In that case, it works in your favor: it's just more data that you're a bona fide AZ resident. I was pointing out that if your children stay in CA while you go to NV, it works against you.
And AZ isn't NV. The FTB pays special attention to NV in particular because it has no income tax. Someone who moves to AZ isn't so obviously trying to skirt CA state income tax.
My case was a little special because I sold a lot of stock right after leaving CA, which makes it a little suspicious to the FTB.
I have used Threema and I like it, but the barrier is that it is not a free app. I've only been able to get fellow nerds to install it.
I like the idea that it indicates the level of safety you have with another person quite clearly. The highest level is when you physically scan one another's QR codes when you meet in person so you know nobody is inserting themselves into your key exchange.
That's not even the real problem, though. The problem is that banks don't want to deal with the FATCA compliance issues and just refuse to deal with Americans, period. I've experienced this firsthand as an American expat and it is a colossal pain in the ass.
[1] https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/fore...