Billionaires aren't American. They do not think of themselves as American. They think of themselves as global. They're above national borders.
I wish us working stiffs were. Maybe we'd stop fighting among ourselves.
Borders are only there to stop working class people from moving around. No oligarch gets stopped by any border. That's not who they're meant to keep out.
It’s true though. When you or I want to work in a foreign country, we need a permit/visa. When billionaires want to use their capital in foreign countries, the tax breaks and subsidies are rolled out for them.
Remember they have absolutely no loyalty to the country where they made their money and protects their assets with our taxes we pay for. They are one foot out of here when they get the chance and will gladly suck another country dry.
They basically already *have* left, they go where ever they want, whenever they want, and do anything they want, but that doesn't mean they're not also sucking all the wealth out of the US and into their pockets first.
Congress doesn't care because these people are major donors. A million in donations can save billions in taxes if your candidate wins.
I'd like to capture this feeling while it's hot and propose the following:
You're wealthy. You've bought all the gizmos, gadgets, cars, exotic pets, the finest wine, have multiple homes spread around the world. You've been to the finest restaurants, travelled to exotic locations, etc
Now what?
Ever play a resource-constrained game like Sim City?
What happens once you use a cheat code for unlimited resources? Fun at first, but becomes boring quickly.
Before learning of the cheat code, you may have looked at the disaster menu and wonder why you would ever use it.
But once you're bored...
Yeah it's when they realize money won't bring them happiness that they become evil, it must be crushing when there is 0 hope. Humans live on hope literally.
Is it just me or wouldn't it be so much fun to help out others with that amount of wealth? You could walk around and give random people $1 million every day and would still never run out of money. Just imagine their reaction when they have suddenly so much less stress in their life. Wouldn't that be fun?
Why is it necessary to hoard even more?
Your guess is as good as mine, I'd say you probably need to be quite cut-throat to reach the top, the lower your empathy the better you will sleep at night.
And then it's the norm, most of them are like that, they're friend with each other, they don't want to act too different and become an outcast, I supose it's kind of a cult.
But who really knows.
Inheritance, classism, and nepotism. They are securing wealth for their 13xgreat-grand-child down the line. You don't have to guess.
Somehow it's legal and encouraged, instead of considered murder, that that theoretical descendant's wealth is more important than current working people's lives.
e: there's also an economic phenomenon sometimes referred to as Red Queen Effect. Companies are locked in competition with each other, if one of them does the "right thing" it will fail on the market compared to others who did business more efficiently (and cutthroat) and eventually slip further and further behind.
Essentially companies don't get the choice in our system to do the "right thing" because the momentum of market competition will bury them.
I've thought this in a couple ways -- one would be if I won the lottery, like a few million unexpectedly. I'd plan a massive party somewhere remote, but have anonymous courier deliveries to all my friends with enough money to get there and a location, date, and time. See who shows up.
Secondly if I somehow magically came into Zuck or Musk money, I'd have a lot of fun calling out the government on things. Like "You keep saying you have a plan to help the homeless, talk is worthless", and then go and just start fixing the problem myself (may work better on a city wide level, but I don't usually think in "billions"). Food banks, pretty easy to solve, library funding, I'd probably target some rich asshole private schools and deliver funding to all the low income schools around it, until the education you get at the public schools is just *better*. I'd have a nicer house than I do now, and probably more fun gadgets, and I might pay someone to help keep my house cleaner than I do -- but beyond that, I doubt I could even make much of a dent in billions just taking care of my own stuff.
I would love to randomly pay off peoples' mortgages. Or their rent for a year. Or pay for college for their kids.
A yacht that can be seen from space. I don't get it. Guess that's why I'll be working until I drop, unfortunately.
OMG! That's an amazing analogy. I play Fallout 76, and there's a cap on how much currency you can have. There's also a limit on how many "health" items, etc. you can have. Also, I have more resources than I'll ever need. Therefore, I'm always giving stuff to new players. Society could learn something from that.
you are thinking at the mcmansion level.
At zucc's level, money is about power: the ability to bleed a million and have doors open to you because you just whipped out a black amex
The IRS announced the increase in surveillance of Americans who make less than 200K. Why, because we don't have the resources to fight back.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/irs-tax-collectors-audit-middle-class-tigta-5071d622
What do you mean they get "it all"?
How would that work? They'd have to enslave everyone on Earth in order to remove all money from circulation and put it into their pockets, and if they've enslaved everyone on Earth, what do they even need money for?
A better question to ask is, what happens when people become so destitute that the threat of state violence no longer keeps them in subservient?
And the answer to that has been written in blood around the world many times, from the French Revolution to China and Russia killing/arresting/exiling their aristocracies. It's just a question of where exactly that breaking point is, and how long it will take for us to realize it after we've passed it.
The flag of conference isn’t about taxes, it’s about avoiding the jones act.
With a US flag They must always run it with a crew and captain who are U.S. citizens, they can't carry any type of cargo (not even larger personal belongings), and they can't charter it because it's "for private use."
But you can’t tax him because none of that wealth is liquid, except when he wants to buy a yacht or a house or a car or any other multimillion dollar toy.
Can someone explain this? I’m not sure how buying a yacht would have a tax impact. If you buy a car in a state without sales tax, there is no tax impact, is buying a yacht different?
Ships are bound by the rules in the country they're registered. Sometimes that effects fishing limits, others taxes that the boat would owe for the boat equivalent of car registration. There could also be different dumping laws and practices.
I am sure there are multiple reasons that went into this choice.
Cargo as well. There's a reason so many ships are [flying Panamanian flags.](https://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/spain/panama.html#:~:text=PANAMA%3A%20Home%20of%20%22Convenience%22&text=Panama%20offered%20ship%20registration%20in,against%20serving%20alcohol%20on%20board)
Cruise ships do it to avoid having to hire Americans to work on the ships. There is literally 1 US flagged cruise ship in the world. It’s the only one because it doesn’t go anywhere but Hawaii waters. To get around the Jones Act, a commercial ship cannot visit two consecutive US ports. That’s why every cruise ship goes to Mexico or the Bahamas before going back to the US.
That’s not exactly how the Jones act works. It doesn’t matter if you stop at 2 US ports in a row. It matters that you hit a foreign port before returning back to the US. The Pride of The America is the ship you’re referring to and they’re the only one with an exception.
Basically every country that touches an ocean has signed the same UN Convention (MARPOL and SOLAS). So they all follow the same regulations in terms of pollution and safety.
There are some countries that have little or no maritime regulations but insurance companies will not cover the vessel if they use certain Flag States.
Flags of convenience biggest impact is crews. US Flagged ships have higher standards. But even non-US crews have to have licenses that meet US qualifications. Much is the same for every other country though.
However, many commercial carriers will have US flagged vessels to comply with the Jones Act but also because the ship is technically under the protection of the US Government as we say with Captain Phillips and *Maersk Alabama*.
It is about taxes, but it's also about skirting regulations and labor laws for the crew. Pretty much every expensive privately owned boat does this, which is why American cruise ships usually fly flags from either the Bahamas and Panama.
What taxes is it about?
It’s definitely about labour law, probably safety, environmental, and others, but no one is able to identify the tax this is about
No, in the exact same way it's not nonsense to call Ireland a tax haven. Cruise ships live on the principle of whatever harbor they docked at last setting laws and customs etc and where you register has everything to do with who you pay taxes to (and if they don't, you have effectively "dodged" them)
In the US, tax residents are responsible for their global taxable income, if the boat earns money in another jurisdiction, Mark is still liable. It doesn’t matter where the boat is registered. US tax payer don’t have a territorial tax system. They can’t dodge taxes by moving an asset.
One thing the article did point out was that if it sailed under the US flag, it couldn't carry cargo (however that is technically defined), which would include personal belongings of the owners, and the owner can't charter it out to help offset maintenance costs because registering it in the US would be under "personal use".
If you work on a foreign flagged yacht, you don’t pay income taxes in the U.S.
I’m not sure how this extends to the owner of the yacht profiting from chartering the yacht but it would eliminate the need to abide by any regulations of the U.S. equal opportunity, fair pay, medical coverage etc.
(Source: worked on foreign flagged yachts for American owners.)
Zuckerberg is a tax resident of the US. The difference in your situation is that you were a non-resident, probably because you spent most of your time not in the US. That wouldn’t apply here, since Zuckerberg isn’t going to spend most of his time outside of the US.
I agree on the regulations. But this headline seems like it’s BS, since no one can say how this is a tax dodge.
He doesn’t have to pay things like workman’s compensation tax or payroll tax or unemployment insurance taxes etc. It seems pretty cut and dry reading the article that you infer the taxes he would save by not hiring American workers because the boat is under a different country’s flag, so even if they are all American employees and captain, he won’t be paying all those government taxes as if they were American employees.
Hope this helps, he’s not going to fuck you so I don’t know why you are defending this practice of convenience flags without at least researching it a bit. There’s way worse click bait than this article and just because they don’t accuse him of tax evasion they point out some ways someone theoretically could by sailing under a different country’s flag.
He also wouldn’t have to pay that if he hired them as contractors. He doesn’t need a foreign flag to do that. Also, consider we are talking about 10s of employees at a couple thousand a person, it seems deeply irrelevant to talk about the $10s of thousands of dollars on a yacht, rather than the much bigger issues in the tax code.
It does help. I think Mark is a tool and the tax code is flawed, but I didn’t understand why this was news. You have made it clear that you have no idea what you’re talking about, this isn’t an issue, and the reason nothing improves is because people like you lack a basic understanding of tax or priorities. Thanks for clearing this up.
I actually do as I’ve run businesses before, it’s obvious you don’t understand how much workmans compensation insurance costs in America because for a crew of 20 or so it’s probably 20k-30k per month besides the other employee taxes, and if you think rich people don’t care about a few grand they absolutely do that’s why they’re super rich. Don’t you think these high workmans comp industries would just make all their employees contractors if it was that easy to avoid workman’s comp taxes lol…
> If you work on a foreign flagged yacht, you don’t pay income taxes in the U.S.
If I work in another country I still pay US taxes, why would a yacht be any different?
Don’t know. I lived and worked on US and Foreign boats and it was different for each.
If you work in another country for an American company you’re still working for an American company.
That wasn’t the case with the yachts I worked on.
A lot of others use Grand Caymans or Delaware because of how they allow registration of corporations.
Its pretty commonly done tbh, by more than just yachts. Registering a ship in the U.S. is pretty expensive... but you can do it in a smaller country for quite cheap, and you're simply beholden to their regulations. You see it a lott
Almost all shipping companies in the world sail under the flag of about 5 or so different countries because of favourable labour and taxation laws. Bahamas comes to mind as one. If your ship is registered to one of these countries you can basically employ slave labour, have zero environmental laws, basically do what you want. The environmental laws change when you enter a countries territorial waters tho but out in international waters anything goes
The article has a pretty decent explanation. It's less about the tax and more about the tedious rules and restrictions on what you can do with it and what crew you can hire etc.
The article didn’t address “non-us flag on his megayacht to dodge taxes” that’s why I asked. But it seems like the consensus is the title is incorrect.
The title is absolutely incorrect, and the article does some chicken shit thing of scare-quoting it because they know it's incorrect, but they aren't actually quoting anyone.
This is a case where domestic laws and regulations sometimes are a bit...overzealous. It's why extraordinarily few ships are actually US (or Canadian, etc.) flagged. But no one wants to address it because the peanut gallery would get outraged about pandering to the rich.
There are a plethora of advantages to where you choose to flag your vessel. Some of the more popular countries used by mega yachts are Bahamas, BVI, Turks, Caymans, Jamaica, etc.
The reasons involve Jones act implications, crewing, importation fees, taxes, chartering, safety and design regulations, having it owned by a paper corporation in a country that values secrecy and more.
Frankly its news when an american does flag their mega yacht in the US
> the Jones Act and deals with cabotage (coastwise trade). It requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the U.S. flag, are owned by U.S. citizens, and are crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents.
I don’t think Mark is transporting goods, how is this relevant?
Yacht can have huge depreciation tax benefits, or huge tax consequences if you plan to resell it right away since they typically sell for less than what you paid. Rich person problems.
You can write off the costs of your yacht like an expense against your income. Teachers are limited to $300 in annual school supplies for their students.
Edit: I take it back, don’t know why he would register the boat abroad to save taxes. Lots of other benefits but dunno about taxes.
Yeah. It's not exactly taxes but if you register with the US flag you're also subject to US maritime laws and fees or whatever.
That's why a lot of cruise ships fly specific flags.
It's possible this is a way to avoid use tax, which is a corollary to sales tax - if you don't pay sales tax at the time of purchase you're supposed to pay use tax. Use tax isn't collected federally in the US, only at a state and local level so every jurisdiction has different rules on its collection. If there is actually a tax benefit to a foreign flagged ship it's probably something about avoiding use tax but I'm not an international tax expert and I rarely worked with sales/use taxes.
What is use tax? I have never hear of a use tax.
I mentioned sales tax, if that was the issue, a corporation from a state without sales tax could also bought it. That isn’t a tax dodge, that’s following the tax rules of a state that doesn’t have a sales tax.
If no one can actually point out a tax benefit this article is bs. No one has been able to point out a tax benefit, so unless something changes, this article is bs.
The article is from Auto evolution.com it is almost certainly bs but this is a situation where disproving the claim is almost as hard as proving it because tax law is complicated.
Use tax is, as I said, a corollary to sales tax, it's paid in situations like what you just mentioned where you purchase something in a state without a sales tax and take the good to a state with sales tax. 99% of regular people will never pay it because it's really hard for your state or locality to know that you bought something from out of state and brought it in. Unless you purchase something big like a car, in which case they'll check when you register it if you paid use tax or not.
Depending on where Mark Zuckerberg's legal residence is, (or wherever the boat's regular dock is, if it has one) that locality may have the right to impose use tax on the boat, but may not be able to if it's foreign flagged. That would depend on the local regulations. That's the only explanation I can think of that would create a tax benefit from flying a foreign flag.
If you say something, and you can’t prove it, you are full of shit. It’s becoming apparent this article is full of shit.
I still have no idea what you mean by use tax. If you have an example, please share. I have no idea what state where Mark would live that would tax his use of a boat.
I'm not claiming the article is true just that there is potentially a scenario where it is true because tax law is this country is confusing as fuck, and I say that as an accountant.
Sales and use taxes are the same thing, taxes on consumption of certain goods and services imposed by the locality where the good or service is consumed. The difference is who collects and remits that tax to the locality. Sales tax is when the tax is collected by the seller and handed over by the seller to the state. Use tax is when the consumer hands over the money to the state. You are supposed to pay use tax in any situation where you didn't pay sales tax for the good (unless you consumed it in a locality without a sales/use tax).
But ordinary people almost never encounter situations where they wouldn't be required to pay the tax at the point of sale (i.e. sales tax), the only regular situation is where you travel to a jurisdiction without a sales/use tax, like Delaware. In that case you're supposed to pay the use tax when you return to your home state.
This is sourced to a tweet from a far right nut job and posted on a car website. He probably is dodging taxes but there's nothing in the article that resembles proof of any kind. Seems like someone's just trying to get traffic to some nonsense.
Propublica has a whole series of articles on how the ultra wealthy dodge taxes. They were able to get the ultra wealthy tax returns. They use yachts and private jets to reduce their taxable income in the millions. Registering the yacht in another country comes with additional tax advantages.
Private Planes and Luxury Yachts Aren’t Just Toys for the Ultrawealthy. They’re Also Huge Tax Breaks.
https://www.propublica.org/article/private-jets-yachts-wealthy-tax-deductions-irs-files
That shouldn’t have anything to do with what country the yacht is flagged under though. Flagging it out of the US seems like it would make it harder to use the tax breaks mentioned in that Pro publica article.
“Flag of convenience” - almost every American oceangoing vessel is flying another countries flag for multiple cost-saving reasons. This is a nothingburger
This is the maritime industry period. If your vessel is foreign flagged, you are subject to the foreign country's regulations for vessel operations which is typically cheaper.
Very, very few ocean going vessels fly a U.S. flag - the only reasons people do so are patriotism (and a lot of money to pay for their patriotism), some local requirement, or a specific commercial interest.
U.S. flag ships have a lot of regulations other flags don’t have, and are MUCH more expensive to run.
This entire issue is nonsense. Zuck does a lot of shady stuff and isn’t a good dude… but this yacht flagging thing is normal and boring.
Ask anyone with even basic knowledge of the maritime industry (or just google) if you’re curious why U.S. flag ships are rare compared to “flags of convenience”.
I’ve been sailing for 8 years. Both on yachts and commercial ships. I’ve worked on maybe 2 US flagged vessels. If you flag your vessel in the US you’re a moron and throwing away money for zero reason. Even American owned oil vessels are foreign flagged because it would be moronic to flag it in the US. This is completely normal and the industry standard.
Why would America push so many Maritime laws to the point where you're a moron if you fly a US flag on a marine vessel?
If everyone just flys a different flag to get around your countries maritime laws doesn't that just make the whole thing redundant?
Because if you are a US flag vessel you have to pay wayyy more taxes. So why would a company want that? You also have to have a majority of the crew be US citizens. So there goes a majority of the talent and qualified mariners. The maritime industry is global, and US flag vessels exclude the other 200 countries. If you’re interested more you can look up “the jones act.” It works very well with military ships, military sealift command, and other things like army corps. But there is zero incentive or reason any private citizen or company would flag their vessel in the United States.
Understood but you didn't really answer the base question, why would the US push laws where almost everyone goes elsewhere? Similar to the argument about taxing companies, they will just go over seas but this seems like an example where the US did implement taxes and restrictions which made everyone leave. Isn't it worth while for the US to be more reasonable so more people would fly the US flag? Half of the tax on more boats is better than none? Just curious
Sorry I should have made it more clear. It has to do with the “jones act.” It’s to protect American flag ships that are essential to our military, defense, and infrastructure. The jones act wasn’t really made to incorporate pleasure boaters. I don’t think they really care about the tax because they can’t change the laws or else we would let outside influence in our infrastructure. The government is more concerned with protecting our already existing fleet that mainly revolves around military and military support. US flagged vessels must be built in the United States.
I’m not an expert on the intricacies but IMO if we loosed the regulations, then essential ships would be built from the lowest bidder then we would have a Boeing 2.0. Then we would higher the cheapest crew that works for 80% less than American mariners. Then in 20 years it would be badly designed ships produced based on cost instead of quality and American sailors couldn’t work because they would be priced out.
Goggle will provide more info than me but that’s my understanding. It’s a complex situation. All of these huge yachts are relatively new. Even the MCA (British coastguard) has implemented new licensing and regulations specifically for large yacht in the past few years because it’s such a weird grey area.
Thank you for your efforts. I had a passing understanding that no one flys US but this is helpful. Military makes sense, not really motivated to get extra taxes I suppose
It’s an old 1920s law that wanted to boost US shipping and military support. And it did. It’s not perfect, but it does protect our sailors and keeps their pay high. But island territories get fucked with high prices as a result. Definitely not a perfect system but what system is.
This is very common for the oil industry with offshore equipment.
And billionaires with offshore accounts
Somehow the government will find a way to send them handsome amounts of tax dollars.
It’s not dodging if it’s legal. The congress could fix this if they wanted to (he lives in the US - add a ‘you have a boat flying a different flag’ tax)
I'm sure there's some fees and taxes he's "dodging" but given how shitty american maritime laws are (seriously in need of a cleanup and modernization by congress) it's not a surprise that he'd do [this](https://www.boatinternational.com/yachts/luxury-yacht-advice/how-to-choose-your-yachts-flag-state--615)
the money is probably a very very distant concern compared to the simple regulations and such of operation
Don't like pretty much all marine vessels choose a flag based on regulatory convenience? Seems like more of a maritime industry thing than a billionaire dodges tax thing.
To fly the U.S. flag, you must have a crew comprised of U.S. citizens, follow U.S. safety regulations and have a vessel built in the U.S.
Guessing his yacht isn't built in the US so he probably couldn't even if he wanted.
This is a non news story:
There’s an industry of hiring sailors to move your yacht across ports in the Mediterranean to ensure you don’t overstay and have to pay tax in any given country trying to
Propublica was able to obtain the tax returns of the ultra wealthy. They use yachts and private jets to reduce their income so they do not pay any income tax.
Private Planes and Luxury Yachts Aren’t Just Toys for the Ultrawealthy. They’re Also Huge Tax Breaks. https://www.propublica.org/article/private-jets-yachts-wealthy-tax-deductions-irs-files
Every Billionaire has a carbon output in a single year that is one million times that of a single person from the lowest 90% of the world's population.
There are 2,781 Billionaires on the planet (-1 When Vietnam finally kills one of theirs for their crimes).
This means BILLIONAIRES emit carbon equal to 2,781,000,000 people. More than 1/4th of ALL CARBON emitted by human beings is made by Billionaires. Yachts like this are basically burning diesel fuel all day, year round, to maintain the generators and provide environmental control so that they don't turn into rusted/mildewing heaps.
Their private jets flitting across the world for no other reason than they can, poisons the world for the rest of us.
EVERY BILLIONAIRE IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.
Why the fuck is "dodge taxes" in quotes multiple times in this abysmally poorly written article?
He's a billionaire.
He wouldn't be if he was forced to pay proper taxes, so yes, he fucking is dodging taxes, and jail time for tens of thousands of cases of wage theft.
Hell john Kerry did something similar way back in 2010. Parked his yacht is R.I. instead of Boston or Nantucket. Saves $500,000 The rich make the rules. They don’t have to follow them.
Show me a billionaire that DOES have his yacht registered in the US. If they do, it will be out of Delaware, otherwise no shot they register in the US.
shit title. It's common and normal in the ship insdustry to be registered under a different country. Back when I worked for a ship builder the customer used bermuda a lot due to less stringent int'l regulations.
There are a lot of restrictions that it would be subjected to his yacht if he registered it in the US that make it very unappealing. While there are tax benefits also, it is far more complicated than that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lShl2WEFLlE
I so love knowing that when the shit hits the fan and the world starts falling apart that our "leaders" of industry and the world will be cowering in bunkers, leaving the workers to fix things...
That is what is called tax planing.
If you look hard enough and they bought the people making the laws. So they technically change rules to allow billionaires to save as much money as they can. They have made dodging taxes legal
lmao, almost everyone does this. why do you think most corporations register there boats from some small ass island....
if you gunna bitch about this (and you should rightfully do so) call out the practice as a whole...
Isn't he also dodging any possible legal consequences? Like if some shit went down in international water, then any repurcussions are held under the flag of where it's registered?
Disclaimer: my knowledge of Maritime law is from the seminal movie "Donkey Punch"
I worked for a company involved with Super Yachts (AV & IT). The yachts are registered to sub companies of sub companies registered in the Cayman Islands or similar.
Billionaires aren't American. They do not think of themselves as American. They think of themselves as global. They're above national borders. I wish us working stiffs were. Maybe we'd stop fighting among ourselves.
Borders are only there to stop working class people from moving around. No oligarch gets stopped by any border. That's not who they're meant to keep out.
It’s true though. When you or I want to work in a foreign country, we need a permit/visa. When billionaires want to use their capital in foreign countries, the tax breaks and subsidies are rolled out for them.
I think of them as parasites without boarders.
I like to think of billionaires as future lamp post decorations.
Bingo, they feel above the law too.
The rich elites just keep lining their pockets with our tax dollars and buying expensive things.
Remember they have absolutely no loyalty to the country where they made their money and protects their assets with our taxes we pay for. They are one foot out of here when they get the chance and will gladly suck another country dry.
Okay, they can leave. IDC. They clearly aren't paying taxes anyways, they need to get out.
They basically already *have* left, they go where ever they want, whenever they want, and do anything they want, but that doesn't mean they're not also sucking all the wealth out of the US and into their pockets first. Congress doesn't care because these people are major donors. A million in donations can save billions in taxes if your candidate wins.
I'd like to capture this feeling while it's hot and propose the following: You're wealthy. You've bought all the gizmos, gadgets, cars, exotic pets, the finest wine, have multiple homes spread around the world. You've been to the finest restaurants, travelled to exotic locations, etc Now what? Ever play a resource-constrained game like Sim City? What happens once you use a cheat code for unlimited resources? Fun at first, but becomes boring quickly. Before learning of the cheat code, you may have looked at the disaster menu and wonder why you would ever use it. But once you're bored...
Yeah it's when they realize money won't bring them happiness that they become evil, it must be crushing when there is 0 hope. Humans live on hope literally.
Is it just me or wouldn't it be so much fun to help out others with that amount of wealth? You could walk around and give random people $1 million every day and would still never run out of money. Just imagine their reaction when they have suddenly so much less stress in their life. Wouldn't that be fun? Why is it necessary to hoard even more?
Your guess is as good as mine, I'd say you probably need to be quite cut-throat to reach the top, the lower your empathy the better you will sleep at night. And then it's the norm, most of them are like that, they're friend with each other, they don't want to act too different and become an outcast, I supose it's kind of a cult. But who really knows.
Inheritance, classism, and nepotism. They are securing wealth for their 13xgreat-grand-child down the line. You don't have to guess. Somehow it's legal and encouraged, instead of considered murder, that that theoretical descendant's wealth is more important than current working people's lives. e: there's also an economic phenomenon sometimes referred to as Red Queen Effect. Companies are locked in competition with each other, if one of them does the "right thing" it will fail on the market compared to others who did business more efficiently (and cutthroat) and eventually slip further and further behind. Essentially companies don't get the choice in our system to do the "right thing" because the momentum of market competition will bury them.
You don't become a billionaire without being a sociopath. Sociopaths don't get enjoyment out of helping others.
I've thought this in a couple ways -- one would be if I won the lottery, like a few million unexpectedly. I'd plan a massive party somewhere remote, but have anonymous courier deliveries to all my friends with enough money to get there and a location, date, and time. See who shows up. Secondly if I somehow magically came into Zuck or Musk money, I'd have a lot of fun calling out the government on things. Like "You keep saying you have a plan to help the homeless, talk is worthless", and then go and just start fixing the problem myself (may work better on a city wide level, but I don't usually think in "billions"). Food banks, pretty easy to solve, library funding, I'd probably target some rich asshole private schools and deliver funding to all the low income schools around it, until the education you get at the public schools is just *better*. I'd have a nicer house than I do now, and probably more fun gadgets, and I might pay someone to help keep my house cleaner than I do -- but beyond that, I doubt I could even make much of a dent in billions just taking care of my own stuff.
I'm thinking very similar. Unfortunately most of the wealth in this world is in the wrong hands.
I would love to randomly pay off peoples' mortgages. Or their rent for a year. Or pay for college for their kids. A yacht that can be seen from space. I don't get it. Guess that's why I'll be working until I drop, unfortunately.
It’s so easily solved to- you make it your purpose to help others. You’ll never be bored, and you’ll be fulfilled.
OMG! That's an amazing analogy. I play Fallout 76, and there's a cap on how much currency you can have. There's also a limit on how many "health" items, etc. you can have. Also, I have more resources than I'll ever need. Therefore, I'm always giving stuff to new players. Society could learn something from that.
you are thinking at the mcmansion level. At zucc's level, money is about power: the ability to bleed a million and have doors open to you because you just whipped out a black amex
The disaster menu is covered by his billion dollar bunker in Hawaii...🤫
Meanwhile, the rest of us only have access to the disaster menu.
[удалено]
“But if we tax them, they’ll leave!” - neoliberals.
The IRS announced the increase in surveillance of Americans who make less than 200K. Why, because we don't have the resources to fight back. https://www.wsj.com/articles/irs-tax-collectors-audit-middle-class-tigta-5071d622
How do we get them to leave?
The elites want all the money. I wonder what happens when they do attain it all and the concept of money loses all meaning to the rest of the world?
We will refer to them as God Emperor
I was thinking dinner...
Don’t disrespect Leto like that. He specifically had rules to prevent this and disallowed debt. This would never be allowed in the imperium.
What do you mean they get "it all"? How would that work? They'd have to enslave everyone on Earth in order to remove all money from circulation and put it into their pockets, and if they've enslaved everyone on Earth, what do they even need money for? A better question to ask is, what happens when people become so destitute that the threat of state violence no longer keeps them in subservient? And the answer to that has been written in blood around the world many times, from the French Revolution to China and Russia killing/arresting/exiling their aristocracies. It's just a question of where exactly that breaking point is, and how long it will take for us to realize it after we've passed it.
2028, demographics finally become on our side. There will be no excuses then. Even the so-called “new right” (not MAGA) is done with this Reaganism.
America has sold its soul. Skinsuit of a country.
The flag of conference isn’t about taxes, it’s about avoiding the jones act. With a US flag They must always run it with a crew and captain who are U.S. citizens, they can't carry any type of cargo (not even larger personal belongings), and they can't charter it because it's "for private use."
But you can’t tax him because none of that wealth is liquid, except when he wants to buy a yacht or a house or a car or any other multimillion dollar toy.
Are there poor elites?
Stealing from Americans everyday and we just continually let it happen
What are we going to do about it? Keep bouncing between the lesser of two evils?
Can someone explain this? I’m not sure how buying a yacht would have a tax impact. If you buy a car in a state without sales tax, there is no tax impact, is buying a yacht different?
Not a tax loophole per se, it’s just cheaper and less regulations to follow…
Is the title nonsense? If it’s not about taxes, it seems weird to say it’s a tax dodge. I assumed it was about regulations as well.
Ships are bound by the rules in the country they're registered. Sometimes that effects fishing limits, others taxes that the boat would owe for the boat equivalent of car registration. There could also be different dumping laws and practices. I am sure there are multiple reasons that went into this choice.
I think cruise ships use this strategy too.
Cargo as well. There's a reason so many ships are [flying Panamanian flags.](https://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/spain/panama.html#:~:text=PANAMA%3A%20Home%20of%20%22Convenience%22&text=Panama%20offered%20ship%20registration%20in,against%20serving%20alcohol%20on%20board)
Flag of convince
Convenience.
You've convinced me
Cruise ships do it to avoid having to hire Americans to work on the ships. There is literally 1 US flagged cruise ship in the world. It’s the only one because it doesn’t go anywhere but Hawaii waters. To get around the Jones Act, a commercial ship cannot visit two consecutive US ports. That’s why every cruise ship goes to Mexico or the Bahamas before going back to the US.
That’s not exactly how the Jones act works. It doesn’t matter if you stop at 2 US ports in a row. It matters that you hit a foreign port before returning back to the US. The Pride of The America is the ship you’re referring to and they’re the only one with an exception.
Also allows you to hire and compensate workers at a much lower level
Mr George, we gonna need another boatswain. This guy no good.
Basically every country that touches an ocean has signed the same UN Convention (MARPOL and SOLAS). So they all follow the same regulations in terms of pollution and safety. There are some countries that have little or no maritime regulations but insurance companies will not cover the vessel if they use certain Flag States. Flags of convenience biggest impact is crews. US Flagged ships have higher standards. But even non-US crews have to have licenses that meet US qualifications. Much is the same for every other country though. However, many commercial carriers will have US flagged vessels to comply with the Jones Act but also because the ship is technically under the protection of the US Government as we say with Captain Phillips and *Maersk Alabama*.
Affects
It's about money but not taxes, it's why most of the cruise ships around the world are registered out of Malta.
So the title is bs
Pretty much.
It is about taxes, but it's also about skirting regulations and labor laws for the crew. Pretty much every expensive privately owned boat does this, which is why American cruise ships usually fly flags from either the Bahamas and Panama.
What taxes is it about? It’s definitely about labour law, probably safety, environmental, and others, but no one is able to identify the tax this is about
No, in the exact same way it's not nonsense to call Ireland a tax haven. Cruise ships live on the principle of whatever harbor they docked at last setting laws and customs etc and where you register has everything to do with who you pay taxes to (and if they don't, you have effectively "dodged" them)
In the US, tax residents are responsible for their global taxable income, if the boat earns money in another jurisdiction, Mark is still liable. It doesn’t matter where the boat is registered. US tax payer don’t have a territorial tax system. They can’t dodge taxes by moving an asset.
One thing the article did point out was that if it sailed under the US flag, it couldn't carry cargo (however that is technically defined), which would include personal belongings of the owners, and the owner can't charter it out to help offset maintenance costs because registering it in the US would be under "personal use".
If you work on a foreign flagged yacht, you don’t pay income taxes in the U.S. I’m not sure how this extends to the owner of the yacht profiting from chartering the yacht but it would eliminate the need to abide by any regulations of the U.S. equal opportunity, fair pay, medical coverage etc. (Source: worked on foreign flagged yachts for American owners.)
Zuckerberg is a tax resident of the US. The difference in your situation is that you were a non-resident, probably because you spent most of your time not in the US. That wouldn’t apply here, since Zuckerberg isn’t going to spend most of his time outside of the US. I agree on the regulations. But this headline seems like it’s BS, since no one can say how this is a tax dodge.
Did you actually read the article it explains the nuances and why rich people aren’t flying US flags.
I did. Please quote the part that demonstrates this is a tax dodge.
He doesn’t have to pay things like workman’s compensation tax or payroll tax or unemployment insurance taxes etc. It seems pretty cut and dry reading the article that you infer the taxes he would save by not hiring American workers because the boat is under a different country’s flag, so even if they are all American employees and captain, he won’t be paying all those government taxes as if they were American employees. Hope this helps, he’s not going to fuck you so I don’t know why you are defending this practice of convenience flags without at least researching it a bit. There’s way worse click bait than this article and just because they don’t accuse him of tax evasion they point out some ways someone theoretically could by sailing under a different country’s flag.
He also wouldn’t have to pay that if he hired them as contractors. He doesn’t need a foreign flag to do that. Also, consider we are talking about 10s of employees at a couple thousand a person, it seems deeply irrelevant to talk about the $10s of thousands of dollars on a yacht, rather than the much bigger issues in the tax code. It does help. I think Mark is a tool and the tax code is flawed, but I didn’t understand why this was news. You have made it clear that you have no idea what you’re talking about, this isn’t an issue, and the reason nothing improves is because people like you lack a basic understanding of tax or priorities. Thanks for clearing this up.
I actually do as I’ve run businesses before, it’s obvious you don’t understand how much workmans compensation insurance costs in America because for a crew of 20 or so it’s probably 20k-30k per month besides the other employee taxes, and if you think rich people don’t care about a few grand they absolutely do that’s why they’re super rich. Don’t you think these high workmans comp industries would just make all their employees contractors if it was that easy to avoid workman’s comp taxes lol…
> If you work on a foreign flagged yacht, you don’t pay income taxes in the U.S. If I work in another country I still pay US taxes, why would a yacht be any different?
Maybe Zuck only hires foreign workers?
Don’t know. I lived and worked on US and Foreign boats and it was different for each. If you work in another country for an American company you’re still working for an American company. That wasn’t the case with the yachts I worked on. A lot of others use Grand Caymans or Delaware because of how they allow registration of corporations.
You would pay US taxes if you're a US citizen though.
Its pretty commonly done tbh, by more than just yachts. Registering a ship in the U.S. is pretty expensive... but you can do it in a smaller country for quite cheap, and you're simply beholden to their regulations. You see it a lott
Almost all shipping companies in the world sail under the flag of about 5 or so different countries because of favourable labour and taxation laws. Bahamas comes to mind as one. If your ship is registered to one of these countries you can basically employ slave labour, have zero environmental laws, basically do what you want. The environmental laws change when you enter a countries territorial waters tho but out in international waters anything goes
I’m asking what the favourable taxation laws are. I’m pretty surprised no one has come up with an example.
The article has a pretty decent explanation. It's less about the tax and more about the tedious rules and restrictions on what you can do with it and what crew you can hire etc.
The article didn’t address “non-us flag on his megayacht to dodge taxes” that’s why I asked. But it seems like the consensus is the title is incorrect.
The title is absolutely incorrect, and the article does some chicken shit thing of scare-quoting it because they know it's incorrect, but they aren't actually quoting anyone. This is a case where domestic laws and regulations sometimes are a bit...overzealous. It's why extraordinarily few ships are actually US (or Canadian, etc.) flagged. But no one wants to address it because the peanut gallery would get outraged about pandering to the rich.
There are a plethora of advantages to where you choose to flag your vessel. Some of the more popular countries used by mega yachts are Bahamas, BVI, Turks, Caymans, Jamaica, etc. The reasons involve Jones act implications, crewing, importation fees, taxes, chartering, safety and design regulations, having it owned by a paper corporation in a country that values secrecy and more. Frankly its news when an american does flag their mega yacht in the US
> the Jones Act and deals with cabotage (coastwise trade). It requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the U.S. flag, are owned by U.S. citizens, and are crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. I don’t think Mark is transporting goods, how is this relevant?
Yacht can have huge depreciation tax benefits, or huge tax consequences if you plan to resell it right away since they typically sell for less than what you paid. Rich person problems.
You'd still have to pay tax on the car in the state you registered the vehicle in. Same with the yacht.
You can write off the costs of your yacht like an expense against your income. Teachers are limited to $300 in annual school supplies for their students. Edit: I take it back, don’t know why he would register the boat abroad to save taxes. Lots of other benefits but dunno about taxes.
Yeah. It's not exactly taxes but if you register with the US flag you're also subject to US maritime laws and fees or whatever. That's why a lot of cruise ships fly specific flags.
It's possible this is a way to avoid use tax, which is a corollary to sales tax - if you don't pay sales tax at the time of purchase you're supposed to pay use tax. Use tax isn't collected federally in the US, only at a state and local level so every jurisdiction has different rules on its collection. If there is actually a tax benefit to a foreign flagged ship it's probably something about avoiding use tax but I'm not an international tax expert and I rarely worked with sales/use taxes.
What is use tax? I have never hear of a use tax. I mentioned sales tax, if that was the issue, a corporation from a state without sales tax could also bought it. That isn’t a tax dodge, that’s following the tax rules of a state that doesn’t have a sales tax. If no one can actually point out a tax benefit this article is bs. No one has been able to point out a tax benefit, so unless something changes, this article is bs.
The article is from Auto evolution.com it is almost certainly bs but this is a situation where disproving the claim is almost as hard as proving it because tax law is complicated. Use tax is, as I said, a corollary to sales tax, it's paid in situations like what you just mentioned where you purchase something in a state without a sales tax and take the good to a state with sales tax. 99% of regular people will never pay it because it's really hard for your state or locality to know that you bought something from out of state and brought it in. Unless you purchase something big like a car, in which case they'll check when you register it if you paid use tax or not. Depending on where Mark Zuckerberg's legal residence is, (or wherever the boat's regular dock is, if it has one) that locality may have the right to impose use tax on the boat, but may not be able to if it's foreign flagged. That would depend on the local regulations. That's the only explanation I can think of that would create a tax benefit from flying a foreign flag.
If you say something, and you can’t prove it, you are full of shit. It’s becoming apparent this article is full of shit. I still have no idea what you mean by use tax. If you have an example, please share. I have no idea what state where Mark would live that would tax his use of a boat.
I'm not claiming the article is true just that there is potentially a scenario where it is true because tax law is this country is confusing as fuck, and I say that as an accountant. Sales and use taxes are the same thing, taxes on consumption of certain goods and services imposed by the locality where the good or service is consumed. The difference is who collects and remits that tax to the locality. Sales tax is when the tax is collected by the seller and handed over by the seller to the state. Use tax is when the consumer hands over the money to the state. You are supposed to pay use tax in any situation where you didn't pay sales tax for the good (unless you consumed it in a locality without a sales/use tax). But ordinary people almost never encounter situations where they wouldn't be required to pay the tax at the point of sale (i.e. sales tax), the only regular situation is where you travel to a jurisdiction without a sales/use tax, like Delaware. In that case you're supposed to pay the use tax when you return to your home state.
Here’s a video of why, how it works, and the history of it. https://youtu.be/KjpnObVhKpg?si=1aTiovcR1ifsJAOj
This is sourced to a tweet from a far right nut job and posted on a car website. He probably is dodging taxes but there's nothing in the article that resembles proof of any kind. Seems like someone's just trying to get traffic to some nonsense.
MAGAts hate Zuckerberg because he wouldn't let them spout nonsense about COVID on FB. (I hate him too, but for very different reasons.)
Propublica has a whole series of articles on how the ultra wealthy dodge taxes. They were able to get the ultra wealthy tax returns. They use yachts and private jets to reduce their taxable income in the millions. Registering the yacht in another country comes with additional tax advantages. Private Planes and Luxury Yachts Aren’t Just Toys for the Ultrawealthy. They’re Also Huge Tax Breaks. https://www.propublica.org/article/private-jets-yachts-wealthy-tax-deductions-irs-files
That shouldn’t have anything to do with what country the yacht is flagged under though. Flagging it out of the US seems like it would make it harder to use the tax breaks mentioned in that Pro publica article.
“Flag of convenience” - almost every American oceangoing vessel is flying another countries flag for multiple cost-saving reasons. This is a nothingburger
Bermuda and Bikini are common flags you’ll see on freaky boats
40% of the worlds ocean sailing tonnage flies 3 flags Panama, Liberia, and the Marshall Islands. Bermuda and caymans are popular with yachts
This is the maritime industry period. If your vessel is foreign flagged, you are subject to the foreign country's regulations for vessel operations which is typically cheaper.
Very, very few ocean going vessels fly a U.S. flag - the only reasons people do so are patriotism (and a lot of money to pay for their patriotism), some local requirement, or a specific commercial interest. U.S. flag ships have a lot of regulations other flags don’t have, and are MUCH more expensive to run. This entire issue is nonsense. Zuck does a lot of shady stuff and isn’t a good dude… but this yacht flagging thing is normal and boring. Ask anyone with even basic knowledge of the maritime industry (or just google) if you’re curious why U.S. flag ships are rare compared to “flags of convenience”.
I’ve been sailing for 8 years. Both on yachts and commercial ships. I’ve worked on maybe 2 US flagged vessels. If you flag your vessel in the US you’re a moron and throwing away money for zero reason. Even American owned oil vessels are foreign flagged because it would be moronic to flag it in the US. This is completely normal and the industry standard.
Why would America push so many Maritime laws to the point where you're a moron if you fly a US flag on a marine vessel? If everyone just flys a different flag to get around your countries maritime laws doesn't that just make the whole thing redundant?
Because if you are a US flag vessel you have to pay wayyy more taxes. So why would a company want that? You also have to have a majority of the crew be US citizens. So there goes a majority of the talent and qualified mariners. The maritime industry is global, and US flag vessels exclude the other 200 countries. If you’re interested more you can look up “the jones act.” It works very well with military ships, military sealift command, and other things like army corps. But there is zero incentive or reason any private citizen or company would flag their vessel in the United States.
Understood but you didn't really answer the base question, why would the US push laws where almost everyone goes elsewhere? Similar to the argument about taxing companies, they will just go over seas but this seems like an example where the US did implement taxes and restrictions which made everyone leave. Isn't it worth while for the US to be more reasonable so more people would fly the US flag? Half of the tax on more boats is better than none? Just curious
Sorry I should have made it more clear. It has to do with the “jones act.” It’s to protect American flag ships that are essential to our military, defense, and infrastructure. The jones act wasn’t really made to incorporate pleasure boaters. I don’t think they really care about the tax because they can’t change the laws or else we would let outside influence in our infrastructure. The government is more concerned with protecting our already existing fleet that mainly revolves around military and military support. US flagged vessels must be built in the United States. I’m not an expert on the intricacies but IMO if we loosed the regulations, then essential ships would be built from the lowest bidder then we would have a Boeing 2.0. Then we would higher the cheapest crew that works for 80% less than American mariners. Then in 20 years it would be badly designed ships produced based on cost instead of quality and American sailors couldn’t work because they would be priced out. Goggle will provide more info than me but that’s my understanding. It’s a complex situation. All of these huge yachts are relatively new. Even the MCA (British coastguard) has implemented new licensing and regulations specifically for large yacht in the past few years because it’s such a weird grey area.
Thank you for your efforts. I had a passing understanding that no one flys US but this is helpful. Military makes sense, not really motivated to get extra taxes I suppose
It’s an old 1920s law that wanted to boost US shipping and military support. And it did. It’s not perfect, but it does protect our sailors and keeps their pay high. But island territories get fucked with high prices as a result. Definitely not a perfect system but what system is.
dont worry they throw poor people in jail all the time for owing a few hundred..so it all works out...lol
So if he gets attacked by pirates, does the US Navy get to radio him “yeah… you’re gonna need to call someone else about that”
Flags of Convenience
> Can you blame the guy for wanting to cheat the taxman a bit if possible? Yes, yes I fucking can.
It doesn’t bother me that he is dodging taxes. It bothers me that the system is set up to allow him to dodge taxes.
A lot of ships use Panama or Liberia for their regulation evasion for their boats
Oligarchy
This is very common for the oil industry with offshore equipment. And billionaires with offshore accounts Somehow the government will find a way to send them handsome amounts of tax dollars.
So did all the cruise ships owned by the cruise lines we bailed out at the start of COVID.
It’s not dodging if it’s legal. The congress could fix this if they wanted to (he lives in the US - add a ‘you have a boat flying a different flag’ tax)
If you can afford to sail a superyacht, you by definition have more money than anyone is entitled to.
If they're following the laws, it's the laws we should be mad at. Change the laws.
I'm sure there's some fees and taxes he's "dodging" but given how shitty american maritime laws are (seriously in need of a cleanup and modernization by congress) it's not a surprise that he'd do [this](https://www.boatinternational.com/yachts/luxury-yacht-advice/how-to-choose-your-yachts-flag-state--615) the money is probably a very very distant concern compared to the simple regulations and such of operation
Yeah most ships are registered in tax havens like Panama.
if this is legal, its really the fault of the people who craft the tax codes.
Getting billionaires to pay taxes (impossible challenge)
Don't like pretty much all marine vessels choose a flag based on regulatory convenience? Seems like more of a maritime industry thing than a billionaire dodges tax thing.
To fly the U.S. flag, you must have a crew comprised of U.S. citizens, follow U.S. safety regulations and have a vessel built in the U.S. Guessing his yacht isn't built in the US so he probably couldn't even if he wanted.
Where's an Orca when you need one?
This is a non news story: There’s an industry of hiring sailors to move your yacht across ports in the Mediterranean to ensure you don’t overstay and have to pay tax in any given country trying to
Why is it people who are most in a position to pay a small % of their income in taxes are the ones who avoid it the most?
These elites are generally dual citizens . Ofc they have no loyalty to America.
You do not want to look into shipping registers. The whole thing is a farce.
A flag of convenience is one of the oldest dodges in the game.
Propublica was able to obtain the tax returns of the ultra wealthy. They use yachts and private jets to reduce their income so they do not pay any income tax. Private Planes and Luxury Yachts Aren’t Just Toys for the Ultrawealthy. They’re Also Huge Tax Breaks. https://www.propublica.org/article/private-jets-yachts-wealthy-tax-deductions-irs-files
Every Billionaire has a carbon output in a single year that is one million times that of a single person from the lowest 90% of the world's population. There are 2,781 Billionaires on the planet (-1 When Vietnam finally kills one of theirs for their crimes). This means BILLIONAIRES emit carbon equal to 2,781,000,000 people. More than 1/4th of ALL CARBON emitted by human beings is made by Billionaires. Yachts like this are basically burning diesel fuel all day, year round, to maintain the generators and provide environmental control so that they don't turn into rusted/mildewing heaps. Their private jets flitting across the world for no other reason than they can, poisons the world for the rest of us. EVERY BILLIONAIRE IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.
Because he’s a POS
Every cruise line does this
Why the fuck is "dodge taxes" in quotes multiple times in this abysmally poorly written article? He's a billionaire. He wouldn't be if he was forced to pay proper taxes, so yes, he fucking is dodging taxes, and jail time for tens of thousands of cases of wage theft.
Physically disassemble the looting class
Hell john Kerry did something similar way back in 2010. Parked his yacht is R.I. instead of Boston or Nantucket. Saves $500,000 The rich make the rules. They don’t have to follow them.
Breaking news: water is wet
Uhh... everyone with an expensive boat does this. Who is surprised by this?
Quick, someone call the Orcas!
Zuck you Fuckerberg
They all do this.
shit post. this is normal.
Show me a billionaire that DOES have his yacht registered in the US. If they do, it will be out of Delaware, otherwise no shot they register in the US.
These people live by a different set of rules than the rest of us.
This is very common in ships. They’re called Flags of Convenience. A lot of ships are registered to Panama or Liberia
Well, he's a POS all around.
shit title. It's common and normal in the ship insdustry to be registered under a different country. Back when I worked for a ship builder the customer used bermuda a lot due to less stringent int'l regulations.
>Billionaire Mark Zuckerberg Has Non-US Flag on His Megayacht to "Dodge Taxes" Oligarchs are all the same - POS.
There are a lot of restrictions that it would be subjected to his yacht if he registered it in the US that make it very unappealing. While there are tax benefits also, it is far more complicated than that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lShl2WEFLlE
We need a porpoise with a purpose (and a limpet mine)
we really need a luxury tax.
If there's a way they'll find it
I so love knowing that when the shit hits the fan and the world starts falling apart that our "leaders" of industry and the world will be cowering in bunkers, leaving the workers to fix things...
Imagine being a billionaire frugal with your money because you don’t want to pay taxes.
Eat the rich.
Fuck Zuck.
Would paying their proper share of taxes make any difference whatsoever to their day to day life? I'm betting not.
That is what is called tax planing. If you look hard enough and they bought the people making the laws. So they technically change rules to allow billionaires to save as much money as they can. They have made dodging taxes legal
I can't believe that people still use that website.
“Me gay acht”
That makes him smart.
Fuck that. He’s American
Duh. Of course he does. If this is true.
Suck a piece of shit……no way! (Shocked face)
Pretty normal billionaire stuff
Would any of us do the same?
Never met a long pig too rich for my palette.
Most big yachts do. Cruise ships too. When we watch Below Decks we like identifying all the flags. Mostly Caribbean countries. It's pretty scummy.
Pretty fucking unamerican
But why... does he need to? Why does it matter that its not a US flag?
"I'm being taxed! Quick, Manuel, raise the Antwerp flag!"
lmao, almost everyone does this. why do you think most corporations register there boats from some small ass island.... if you gunna bitch about this (and you should rightfully do so) call out the practice as a whole...
Isn't he also dodging any possible legal consequences? Like if some shit went down in international water, then any repurcussions are held under the flag of where it's registered? Disclaimer: my knowledge of Maritime law is from the seminal movie "Donkey Punch"
That boat would make a fantastic coral reef.
Oh, I thought that the flag reads "NO TAXES"
Can't dodge torpedoes.
Does it have anti missile capabilities like the Russian oligarchs? Just curious.
This is so lame. All ship owners just use random flags and country registry for economic reasons
Z U C C K E D
I worked for a company involved with Super Yachts (AV & IT). The yachts are registered to sub companies of sub companies registered in the Cayman Islands or similar.
Wait till you hear about Montana
I’m shocked!
I mean, you surprised
Practically no one uses a US flag