NationStates Jolt Archive

I've been in the process of brainstorming the idea of a propsal to protect countries from citizens who flee to another country to avoid taxes in their home country.

I was wondering if the NS UN would be interest in such a proposal, and before I write it, what suggestions nations have to go about this in the most appropriate ways.

First and foremost, I do believe this is an international and not national issue; so, if you are opposed to the idea all together, I'd ask that you do so on the basis of something other than the cry of national sovereignty.

Second, my initial thought is to penalize citizens who flee for tax purposes in their home country rather than the countries they travel to to avoid taxes. I'm thinking a monetary punishment or maybe an incremental percentage of tax increase per time they spent as a "tax runaway."

Third, I'm not quite sure how to define a "tax runaway" citizen other than saying that if a person spends "x amount of time outside a country, they receive a y amount of punishment." Any ideas?

This is my initial idea of how to organize the proposal:
Define a tax runaway citizen.
Explain why the UN should take action against to curtail the situation.
Detail how the UN will go about curtailing the situation.
Set-up a primary punishment system for countries that allow tax runaway to occur.

All right, so, let me have it...

I'm also having problems identifying what to categorize this under when, and if, I submit it... so, let me hear your thoughts...

The economy of Adam Island is strengthened by all the money tax avoiders from other nations bring in. We will oppose this proposal because we're a tax haven and proud of it.

How so are you strengthened by others tax money when you cannot collect it yourself?

How so are you strengthened by others tax money when you cannot collect it yourself?

Not tax money- our economy. The tax 'runaways' spend their money here and buy Adam Island products, helping our economy. Some of our most prominent sports teams are owned by tax 'runaways.' Adam Island serves as an important check against nations who think they can steal all sorts of outrageous percentages of their citizens' income. We have a very sensible 2% tax rate, resulting in one of the highest GDP per capitas in the region.

Besides, is this really going to stop any tax runaways? No, they'll just go to non-UN nations as well. This resolution won't have any practical results other than to punish UN-member tax havens.

No, they'll just go to non-UN nations as well. This resolution won't have any practical results other than to punish UN-member tax havens.

It was intended to be written to punish UN nations for not following tax runaway laws, so if their citizens went to a non-UN nation, the propossal would allow them to still collect taxes regardless.

Sounds like a good proposal idea, Tuesday Heights.

First and foremost, I do believe this is an international and not national issue; so, if you are opposed to the idea all together, I'd ask that you do so on the basis of something other than the cry of national sovereignty.

Second, my initial thought is to penalize citizens who flee for tax purposes in their home country rather than the countries they travel to to avoid taxes. I'm thinking a monetary punishment or maybe an incremental percentage of tax increase per time they spent as a "tax runaway."

I agree, it has an argument as an international issue. And I think it's good to punish the offender rather than the nation. I think the NSUN will be interested in a proposal like this.

It was intended to be written to punish UN nations for not following tax runaway laws, so if their citizens went to a non-UN nation, the propossal would allow them to still collect taxes regardless.

Ahh, ok, that makes sense then. In that case, I'll oppose it solely on the grounds that taxes are bad and tax runaways are good for Adam Island economy.

Do you really want to see the poor Adam Islanders starve because of money-grubbing neo-mercantilist governments that tax their most productive citizens to death? Vote against this resolution- just think of the children!

Wow.

This one is going to make refugees life a certain hell. And those who flee a country because of oppression... yipes.

PLEASE add a section that allows for the *tax* to be taken, but does not allow for the *person* to be taken.

IC: As a nation with 100% tax rates, Enn fully supports this proposal to allow us to continue to collect taxes from tax runaways.

OOC: Personally, I'm not that favourable to the idea. As Vastiva says, this could make refugees' lives hell. But if it came to a vote, I would support it for the IC reason.

I agree, it has an argument as an international issue. And I think it's good to punish the offender rather than the nation.

Point well-taken; I will keep that in mind when writing the proposal. Hopefully, I can have a draft by - maybe - Wednesday.

Do you really want to see the poor Adam Islanders starve because of money-grubbing neo-mercantilist governments that tax their most productive citizens to death?

What about Adam Islanders who flee your country to avoid your government's taxes, or does your country not have taxes?

This one is going to make refugees life a certain hell. And those who flee a country because of oppression... yipes.

Perhaps, you and Enn can explain this OOC for me...

A refugee is fleeing a country for certain reasons, usually not taxes, in most cases. Can we agree on that point?

Now, in a country like Enn's, where 100% taxes are in place, I could see why a poor citizen who's staring might want to leave the country to avoid taxes; that's perfectly plausible and understandable.

So, are you saying that because of the example above, I might be isolating a certain population of UN nations? I could see that, too... I wonder if there's a way to counter that. Any suggestions? From anyone?

PLEASE add a section that allows for the *tax* to be taken, but does not allow for the *person* to be taken.

Oh, yeah, definitely; I'd never want the person to be taken, especially in cases we're they're fleeing from a 100% taxable nation.

What about a clause that states if a citizen of a nation flees to another country and seeks asylum for absurd taxes and situations (like the poor person being taxed 100%), that a hold be put on their taxes until their plea for asylum is heard?

Vastiva is of the opinion that this proposal could be use to "report" refugees and those seeking political asylum, under the charges of "tax evasion".

As such, we restate our opinion it should be made clear the *money* may be taken, but the *person* may not be moved if it is not the desire of the host nation to move them.

(OOC:Your last quote wasn't from Adam Island, it was from me, post #9)

As such, we restate our opinion it should be made clear the *money* may be taken, but the *person* may not be moved if it is not the desire of the host nation to move them.

I already asserted that I agreed with this position and that I would make sure it was part of the proposal.

However, what d'you think of the idea of adding a clause to protect those seeking asylum based on taxes?

(OOC:Your last quote wasn't from Adam Island, it was from me, post #9)

That's so weird. I know I quoted you... hmm, I've changed it. Thanks for pointing it out to me! :)

I agree : the people who leave to stay left.

What about Adam Islanders who flee your country to avoid your government's taxes, or does your country not have taxes?


We have a 2% tax rate, and if someone wants to leave our nation, they are completely free to do so at any time, and if they wish to renounce their citizenship, they can fill out a form that taxes five minutes.

Ahh, ok, that makes sense then. In that case, I'll oppose it solely on the grounds that taxes are bad and tax runaways are good for Adam Island economy.

Do you really want to see the poor Adam Islanders starve because of money-grubbing neo-mercantilist governments that tax their most productive citizens to death? Vote against this resolution- just think of the children!

OOC: A real life country that benefits from acting as a tax shelter: SWITZERLAND. ;)

In any event, the idea that protecting money / accounts in a UN resolution is going to stop the problem is going to logically hit the same problem that global disarmament resolutions run into ... all this idea will do is shift money / tax sheltering to non-UN members, of which there are only 36,000+ UN members in a "NationStates" approaching 123,000 "nations" <-- as of today.

The stereotypical anti-Global Disarmament argument: if you reduce the military options of UN members, that only makes non-UN members that much stronger. The same applies here: if you restrict the free market banking systems of UN members, you only drive that business to non-UN members.

The reality is banks benefit from investments, and any UN resolution that builds barriers to economic investments may in fact need to account for the game impact of *lessening* economic freedoms. IRC that may be what "Social Justice" resolutions do.

What I'd expect to see, is socialist nations supporting this measure, while capitalist ones opposing it, because Switzerland is obviously not the only real world example of a country that protects and shelters bank accounts. But I think that no other example is going to be able to offer the same risk adverse interest rate on money put into an "off-shore" bank.

There should be (in NS2) a banking industry. The closest thing we've got in NS is the gambling industry, and I personally don't think that is a good fit.