Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
[quote=”jmcbuilder”]The groundwork is being laid for the taxation of US citizens abroad. Sorry I’m two steps ahead in thinking!![/quote]
Sorry, jmc, but you are at least two steps behind, not ahead. The IRS Code has, for decades, provided for universal taxation of the income of U.S. citizens. It ain’t nuthin’ new. You can ask anyone who actually lives outside the U.S.
And while you can slog through the process of renouncing your U.S. citizenship, you will continue to be liable for U.S. income taxes for something like ten years after your renunciation, so that will provide you little shelter.
Too, income derived in the U.S., regardless of the citizenship of the recipient, is subject to taxation by the IRS. So if, for example, you renounce your citizenship but make taxable withdrawals from an IRA, receive Social Security, have residual income from royalties, rents, etc, you still have to pay U.S. federal income taxes.
[quote=”jmcbuilder”] Let’s say that the US decides to tax the rise in value of your foreign home on a yearly basis. [/quote]
As long as we’re fantasizing, let’s say that the U.S. decides to tax the rise in the value of your domestic (U.S.) home on a yearly basis. So how would living in Costa Rica be any different? And who do you suppose would administer this levy?
And suppose they decided that the depreciation on your car was tax deductible, too.
And suppose they came for our guns, our Bibles, our Torahs and our Korans.
And suppose they round us all up and inter us all (I mean everyone) in the FEMA camps we suppose they’re building (but which no one can find).
And suppose . . .
And suppose . . .
And suppose . . .(ad nauseam).
Of course, no one has proposed any of this, but let’s just let our imaginations run wild (and sound more and more like (you know who)).
That’s right, vache, all homosexuals (of both sexes) are child molesters, as are all Catholic priests. In fact, all the stereotypes apply universally . . .
All southerners are racial bigots.
All California women are valley girls.
All Floridians are elderly, dotty, and drive 35mph in the leftmost lane with their blinker on.
All Christians are Islamophobes.
All Muslims are terrorists.
The poor like living that way.
And on and on . . .
I should add to what’s been written above that too much of the information about Costa Rica both online and in print is way out of date. A book, still for sale, that was published in 2005 was probably researched in 2003. The intervening ten years have seen dramatic changes in costs. Likewise, somebody’s reply from even 2009 will be woefully out of date. Nobody ever updates or redacts the old information.
As for Nicaragua, it’s probably cheaper, but it comes with Daniel Ortega.
Phil, well intentioned though they may be, no one but you can determine what you can live on in Costa Rica or anywhere else. So much depends upon what your real needs are, what your perceived needs are, and what material things are central to your happiness, your wants, that no one can give you specific advice, a specific number. If you can’t be happy living here, you won’t stay and the issue will be moot.
As a U.S. citizen, you will continue to be liable for U.S. income taxes under the IRS Code. That’s not going to change. And while Costa Rican taxes are lower in some respects, the universal sales tax (13%) blunts some of that benefit.
Most imported things are more expensive here than in the U.S. And some things, like electricity, are on an upward climb. Other things are still a bargain.
We, too, tired of long, cold winters, so I can sympathize on that point. Consider Costa Rica for its mild climate, peaceful society, and friendly people, but don’t be misled by someone’s idea of what you can live on until you’ve spent time with boots on the ground doing your own investigation.
[quote=”VictoriaLST”]Dave, retirees have paid into the program. I want to eliminate people with unearned benefits.[/quote]
So, when retirees have received as much as they paid in, you’d cut ’em off (unearned benefits, right?)?
Tut, tut, Scott. If the U.S. takes military action, it must be right and honorable. Didn’t you learn nuthin’ in school? It’s only when the government takes some action that actually benefits some human being or another that it becomes the boogeyman.
[quote=”VictoriaLST”]Ok, back to the original topic.
I am all for cuts in SS. Drug addicts, alcoholics, can qualify for benefits. Lets cut that too.
There are lots of places to cut SS without hurting people who paid into the program over the years.[/quote]
Victoria, if we cut benefits to alcoholics and the drug dependent (both of which groups have legitimate medical diagnoses), what percentage of retirees do you suppose would be removed from the SS roles?
You’re absolutely right, crf. In technical matters, it’s almost always safest to go with proven local methods. What I meant to refer to was more in the vein of design and style opportunities.
As an example, our house is built into the hillside with a deck that extends to the downhill side. Originally, the space under the deck was to have been a carport — convenient for unloading groceries in the rain — but during construction, our architect suggested enclosing that “carport” in glass (cheap and easy) which we did. We gained a lot of additional space at very little cost. Had we not been onsite to discuss this change, we’d have missed the opportunity. And it’s my favorite part of the house.
Similarly, one morning we awoke to part of our bedroom having been completed. There was just one problem. They’d built a solid wall between the bedroom and the bathroom! There was no way in. A quick review of the blueprints revealed the error, but it was one better caught sooner than later, eh?
[quote=”watchdog”]. . . the single most important thing is to be physically present in Costa Rica during the construction phase,[/quote]
This is a great insight. If you’re not here to watch the progress, correctable mistakes will be made, and (equally important) real opportunities will be overlooked and lost.
I actually know of a case where the builder oriented the house in the wrong direction.
Your insights are excellent, Keith, but let me add one more . . .
The earth that you cut into will surely be more stable than the “buildup” of what’s removed, but that doesn’t mean that it cannot or will not collapse. We have friends whose living room had four feet of dirt in it thanks to the hillside that collapsed behind their house, where the earth had been removed to form a nearly vertical face.
If you’re cutting into a hillside, be sure to have the architect and engineer make a recommendation about a retaining wall. It would be money well spent to have them collaborate with a soils engineer, too. A soils engineer can test the soil and specify the angle of the slope that the excavator should create.
[quote=”VictoriaLST”]Must be why Homeland Security just ordered all that ammo :)[/quote]
No, but this might explain it . . .
http://www.thereporter.com/opinion/ci_22910772/rest-easy-about-ammo-purchase
During my undergraduate days at George Washington University, I worked as a lot boy at Capitol Cadillac (then located at 22nd St. NW and Ward Place but now in Greenbelt, MD). Capitol serviced all the White House and State Department limousines, among those of other notables. All those cars were stored overnight in totally unsecured lots — no fences, no guards, no nuthin’.
The government vehicles had little in common with their lookalikes mechanically. Their engines, transmissions, suspensions, etc were “high performance” on a level you cannot imagine. I’d put any one of them up against any Jeep except, of course, in off road situations which they were not designed for.
The Secret Service had one rather rattty 1954 Cadillac limo that we’d see from time to time. Turned out, it was an armored personnel carrier that they included in presidential motorcades. It probably carried twenty agents and, even when we had it in for service, it was packed with .45 caliber pistols, Thompson submachine guns, sawed-off shotguns, .12 gauge flare pistols, and other armament meant to subdue any attack on POTUS. And they were all loaded.
This was in the days of the Weather Underground when, you would think, the Secret Service would have been more cautious.
[quote=”kwhite1″] I can dodge and weave the potholes much better than a limo! Way easier in a Jeep![/quote]
Actually, the Secret Service limos and the drivers who drive them are far more capable than any commercially available Jeep when it comes to obstacle avoidance. That would not hold true off-road, of course, but anyplace the President is likely to go those vehicles and their drivers are in a league of their own.
You’re welcome to ask me how I know . . .
