digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at abcnews.go.com

ABC News: Hundreds of Super Rich Under Investigation

abcnews.go.com — In court documents, federal prosecutors say UBS bankers helped set up many of the secret accounts in Liechtenstein and, overall, hid as much $20 billion belonging to US citizens.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • MorganMghee, on 07/16/2008, -70/+124I don't want to hear ONE word from ANY of these people about their RIGHT TO PRIVACY!
    • dilpil1, on 07/16/2008, -7/+114I do, because denying rights to criminals is an inherently circular process.
      • ProfessorSYM, on 07/17/2008, -5/+6What does this have to do with their "privacy" if this is evidence they broke the law?
      • austin63, on 07/17/2008, -3/+14Because it's the violation of their rights that provides the proof.

        The constitution requires proof before your rights are taken away.
      • cwgannon, on 07/18/2008, -4/+1Or, there's evidence that they are breaking the law, and that evidence is sufficient to warrant an investigation of criminal wrongdoing. Shut the ***** up about Ron Paul, too.
    • vandernderyid, on 07/17/2008, -7/+96So the 4th Amendment only protects people you like?
      • OliveStreet, on 07/17/2008, -21/+40No, his point is that these are the same people who voted for bush and cheney, the two assholes responsible for taking away YOUR right to privacy.
      • majortom1981, on 07/17/2008, -10/+15Wait so you guys are defending the rich who are hiding their money so they don't have to pay taxes on it? The rich should have to pay taxes just like us poor folk have to.
      • Firehed, on 07/17/2008, -4/+42No, we're saying that double-standards are *****, and that it's not worth losing our (and everyone's) right to privacy in order to catch a couple people that screwed the system.
      • jscroft, on 07/17/2008, -5/+15Er... OliveStreet, what makes you so sure all (or even most) of this money belongs to Republicans? Don't you think the Kennedy family probably caches their wealth offshore?
      • mrtrevin, on 07/17/2008, -3/+13A hell of a lot of people voted for Bush and Cheney, not just billionaires. You cannot deny the rights we want to people that you disagree with.
      • ProfessorSYM, on 07/17/2008, -0/+15The 4th amendment only protects against UNREASONABLE search and seizure.

        If there is evidence linking them to these illegal tax shelters, it is not unreasonable to pursue cases against them.
      • MrColdheart, on 07/18/2008, -1/+24th amendment doesnt protect you if you've been found to brake the law.
    • theImmodiumGuy, on 07/17/2008, -1/+50How is this a privacy issue? The IRS did not go to the bank and demand information without just cause. They have a witness who collected evidence (account numbers and amounts) and presented that information to the IRS of his own accord. That's enough for a warrant. No violation of the 4th Amendment here.
      • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -4/+37This guy should be considered a whistle-blower and hero.
      • flogistan, on 07/17/2008, -9/+6I don't even believe this IT guy is the source for most of the information. The whole thing is a veil for violation of the fourth amendment. It's an invention to make the average person feel good about it. The bush administration got access to these records and got the power to punish their political enemies. If you think this came from one IT guy, think again.
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
      • ProfessorSYM, on 07/17/2008, -2/+4Agreed.
      • rearlgrant, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Ooooo. flog -- interesting connection with the WP story. I see your point. This WILL be interesting to watch.

        Anyone want to lay odds on the political affiliations of those named in the warrants?
      • bjornski, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1@rearigrant

        I'm a betting man. Phrase it properly, and I might take it.

        I've got some ideas, but I want to see your cards first.
    • alexanEmpire, on 07/17/2008, -13/+3I'm surprised how this wasn't followed up by some other statement, show casing your rabid diggeralism.


      ***** THE RIAA!!
    • norle, on 07/17/2008, -0/+11We have a right to privacy?? When did that happen?
    • forkthis, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3There's no reasonable expectation of privacy in financial records. i.e., 4th Amendment doesn't apply. Only real protection is statutory, and that's a moving target (e.g., 2001 PATRIOT amendments to RFPA).
      • forkthis, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3For those of you curious about my first statement, see United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976). Though, given the level of digg commentary lately, I doubt folks even RTFA.
      • flogistan, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1I think most of us here are aware that the fourth amendment died primarily due to the need to investigate white collar criminals. You can legislate constitutional rights out of existence. Do we need to agree with it because it happened that way? Some people like to interpret the constitution by original intent rather than a 1976 perspective.
    • twateo, on 07/18/2008, -1/+1may we not forget that our country was founded because we no longer wanted to pay taxes.
      • MrColdheart, on 07/18/2008, -1/+2Correction...Our country was founded because we didn't want to pay taxes to another nation.
      • twateo, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1we were a british colony when we seceded from them. You know we "declared our independence" from them. So what nation were we??? Dumb ass
  • earthforce1, on 07/16/2008, -63/+87> hid as much $20 billion belonging to US citizens.

    No, they hid their own money from the US government. Buried as misleading

    • Cache22, on 07/16/2008, -7/+80Sorry about that, I didn't notice that it reads differently when not in context with the rest of the article when submitting the summary ... but another way to look at it ... U.S. citizens hid their money to evade taxes, creating a larger burden on the rest of the U.S. citizens. Too late to fix the summary, but hey, they are still U.S. citizens, and we are still getting screwed!
      • bradspangler, on 07/17/2008, -39/+12It's a myth that tax evasion creates more of a tax burden for those who choose not to evade.
      • JigoroKano, on 07/17/2008, -11/+26It's a victimless crime, like punching somebody in the dark.
      • greenwald, on 07/17/2008, -11/+2wtf. Don't you mean donkey punching somebody in the dark?
      • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -8/+23@bradspangler

        Are you stupid? Do you really know THAT LITTLE about how it works?

        Well *****! Why don't 90% of us avoid paying taxes. The other 10% can pick up the slack with NO PROBLEM AT ALL!

        Moron.
      • thescimitar, on 07/17/2008, -9/+6Brad's point is being misunderstood (or maybe not, but he may have inadvertently made a good point). Assuming we're talking about income taxes here, the only effect that tax-evaders have on the populace at large is to slow the rate at which we pay down the national debt.

        As long as the government spends like debt is irrelevant (and there's a good argument to that, as well) then income tax evasion is similarly irrelevant.

        I don't know if that was the point he was trying to make or not, but there you go.
      • jbmcb, on 07/17/2008, -11/+9> Well *****! Why don't 90% of us avoid paying taxes. The other 10% can pick up the slack with NO PROBLEM AT ALL!

        The irony is, the "richest" 10% do pay most of the taxes. I don't think it's 90%, but it's close.
      • rugrat54, on 07/17/2008, -8/+1Taxes are VOLUNTARY, so they took their own money and did what they want with it, while "taxpayers" complain about giving their money, voluntarily, to a corrupt CORPORATION.

        Sit back and complain OR READ THE LAW?

        READ THE LAW!!

        http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/taxes.htm

    • jgzman, on 07/17/2008, -9/+15$20 billion they were supposed to pay in taxes? That money is owed to the government, so they can do things that benefit the entire country, not just the rich.

      Note: not $20 billion they were supposed to pay taxes on, but $20 billion in taxes they were supposed to have paid.
      • dpazar2, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2In court documents, federal prosecutors say UBS bankers helped set up many of the secret accounts in Liechtenstein and, overall, hid as much $20 billion belonging to US citizens.

        That would be $20 billion they have to pay taxes on...they would have the money of a small country over there if they owed $20 billion in taxes...assuming 35% taxes...
        20,000,000,000/.35 = $5.714285714 E10

        So there would have to $5.714285714 E10 in that bank if they were to owe $20 Billion in taxes @ 35%
    • strafefire, on 07/17/2008, -8/+10So that is $20 billion more that the US govt can squander...
    • david8370, on 07/17/2008, -3/+1Liechtenstein
    • jreinstedler, on 07/18/2008, -1/+2its not misleading, just read the goddamn article instead of the summary... they suck mostly anyhows.

      Oh, and to all the douchebags at UBS, GFYAD. I hope the govt drops a bomb on your silly little operation...
  • MorganMghee, on 07/16/2008, -26/+31I wonder how much more money would have been available to us, via government taxes voted on by citizens, for alternative energy research had that money been here in the US.
    • SuperWinner, on 07/17/2008, -22/+14Oh ya, all the money going to the government is spent on beneficial things, right. If the US gets their hand on this extra money, 98% of it will go to the US war efforts around the world. I say that money is better off staying in a bank.
      • neotrantor, on 07/17/2008, -3/+2who the ***** would bury you... i was thinking the same thing
    • Hey_Vern, on 07/17/2008, -18/+9Oh ya, all the money going to the government is spent on beneficial things, right. If the US gets their hand on this extra money, 98% of it will go to the US welfare state. I say that money is better off staying in a bank.
    • NotOptium, on 07/17/2008, -12/+15Oh ya, all the money going to the government is spent on beneficial things, right. If the US gets their hand on this extra money, 98% of it will go to *. I say that money is better off staying in my goddamn pocket.
    • flamingduck, on 07/17/2008, -2/+20Uh, am I missing something here or are all three of you looking at each other's papers?
      • 1Bad, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Maybe they are trying to imitate that awesome 100 pushups thread from Reddit. Epic Fail.
    • richmomz, on 07/17/2008, -3/+5But... I thought these people were shouldering most of the tax burden and creating all of our jobs!
      • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -2/+14They create jobs.

        In Malaysia and China.
    • borez, on 07/17/2008, -1/+10Non, don't you know it all goes towards paying off Federal reserve interest.
    • Altotus, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7The nominal tax rate for those rich people would probably average to 20% or so. 20% of 20 billion is 4 billion.

      The 2008 budget ($2.65 trillion) has $2.7 billion total set aside for energy research and development (about 0.1% of the US budget). Assuming that the US would divide the spoils of the windfall tax profits according to the current budget, that would mean we'd increase the Energy R&D spending by $4 million -- a 0.15% increase.

      Incidentally, though the lion's share (54%) of our spending is on the military, a sizable chunk (30%) is on human resources. If we just fired everyone working for the federal government (other than the military) we could save almost $800 billion a year. ;)
      • bradleyland, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4Aaaaaaaahh! The economics! It buuuuurns!
      • dpazar2, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1If they are wealthy, they would either be paying 33% or 35% to uncle sam.
      • Altotus, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Er, their tax bracket would be 33% - 35%, but they'd never be required to pay that amount. Nominal tax rate is the tax paid after all the various deductions, credits, etc. are figured in. Someone in the middle of the 33% tax bracket, owning a home, with a couple of kids, giving 5% of their income to charity, etc. they're probably paying about 21-22% income tax.
    • shaba1, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1ya...u mean the damn wars
  • Minarchian, on 07/17/2008, -20/+52The IRS has been trying to blurr the lines between "tax avoidance" which is legal and " tax evasion" which is not legal, for a long time.

    There is not enough information in this story to prove that these people are evading taxes or avoiding taxes, or using these accounts for other purposes that are perfectly legal.
    • relic180, on 07/17/2008, -10/+29Actually it's pretty obvious that it's tax evasion, not tax avoidance.

      If it were tax avoidance, it would consist of them spending this money on, say, a new business for example. Then buying equipment for that business that constitutes a tax deduction. That's avoidance.

      These people allegedly moved their money someplace that the IRS couldn't see it. Or more officially, they "deliberately misrepresented or concealed the true state of their affairs to the tax authorities". That's evasion. And the line isn't really blurry at all. If their's something related to your finances, taxable or not, that you are intentionally hiding from the IRS, it's evasion.
      • Qtip42, on 07/17/2008, -10/+1Looks pretty blurry of a line to me.
      • relic180, on 07/17/2008, -3/+21If you're doing something to reduce what you're suppose pay in taxes, and you're not telling the IRS about it, it's evasion. That's what these people did.

        Where's the blur?
      • itsallinaname, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4He forgot his glasses.
    • seanof, on 07/17/2008, -0/+14If they were engaged in tax avoidance they would want it well documented so that the IRS could see were the money went and that they are not required to pay tax on it. The only reason to hide it from the IRS is tax evasion.
    • ProfessorSYM, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5"There is not enough information in this story to prove that these people are evading taxes or avoiding taxes, or using these accounts for other purposes that are perfectly legal."

      It is probably a good thing that the IRS will not be basing their case on this article, then.
    • exgop, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Good post Mincharian, normally I disagree with you.
  • relic180, on 07/17/2008, -23/+8While I'm not in favor of violating anybodies privacy, we're currently in a state of emergency.
    Something like this could be equated to marshal law, where the ends justify the means. The vast majority of the super-wealthy are the core problem with the currently broken U.S. political system. It's nice (and very surprising) to see the government doing something against their wishes. Of course that is yet to be seen, as the IRS hasn't actually DONE anything with this information yet.
    • Qtip42, on 07/17/2008, -10/+8You realize that the rich and powerful just have to flex their muscle a little to get the government to drop charges right?
      • relic180, on 07/17/2008, -3/+8Um, yes.

        That's why I said "Of course that is yet to be seen, as the IRS hasn't actually DONE anything with this information yet."
        Thought the implication was obvious.
    • Phearce, on 07/17/2008, -4/+7"While I'm not in favor of violating anybodies privacy, we're currently in a state of emergency."
      OMG. You need to look up fascism.
      • relic180, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3Do you even know what that is, or do you just like to fling emotionally charged words like "fascism" around?
    • jesusfish, on 07/17/2008, -5/+1The ends never justify the means.
      • relic180, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3And operating under absolutes is a sure path to failure.
  • Chahrlie5, on 07/17/2008, -32/+77***** if I had that much money I wouldn't want the government stealing it from me either.
    • airwalkery2k, on 07/17/2008, -3/+20But if you had an low or middle class income, then it would be alright?
      • Chahrlie5, on 07/17/2008, -5/+7Hell no. I don't like the government taking money from me now either.
      • BeyondDGrave, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1http://www.working-minds.com/money.htm
      • GhostToon, on 07/18/2008, -1/+1If I were rich and they wanted me to pay more taxes just because I was successful and made more money I would be pissed. Aren't we all created equal? Why can't we all pay equal taxes?
    • SickMonkey, on 07/17/2008, -5/+13I think about $10 million would buy me pretty much everything I could possibly ever want or need. Why billionaires feel a need to cheat the system given everything thay already have and all of the legal tax loopholes that are already out there is beyond me.
      • Chahrlie5, on 07/17/2008, -4/+4I think you'd have to ask/be a billionaire to understand that.
      • FolkTheory, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3it's probably because the system cheats us all to begin with.
      • Troy64, on 07/17/2008, -3/+2If you earned $10 million you are going to end up with about $6 million after federal, state, local taxes, and FICA. That is under are current taxes. When Obama gets into office that will go down to $5 million or less.
      • Sawta, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Because there's someone with 11$ million.
    • pintomp3, on 07/17/2008, -1/+8We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes.

      - Leona Helmsley
    • 14kygmd, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1So...the wealthy who have had the terrific opportunity to create great wealth for themselves in this country have no responsibility to pay taxes?
    • tsotha, on 07/18/2008, -0/+2It's not the government that's stealing from you. It's your fellow citizens.

      This is what scared the founders about democracy, and why they created a republic.
    • Kanele, on 07/18/2008, -1/+1when's it's that big money, i wouldn't mind, nobody needs 20M$ to live, hell they can take 15 out of it i'd be alright (well not quite, i'd be pissed if these 15M$ would serve for war in Iraq or any other corporation driven activity, but for education or something like that, i'm fine with it)
  • known, on 07/17/2008, -4/+4Business? Quite simple. It's Other Peoples Money. -- Unknown
  • arvvvs, on 07/17/2008, -17/+86Sadly they hid their money even after Bush tax cuts.
    Come on, why should middle and lower, and slightly high pay their taxes while the super rich don't. that is pure wrong.
    • OffPiste, on 07/17/2008, -16/+24Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay 64.89%. The top 25% pay 82.9%. The top 50% pay 96.03%. The bottom 50%? They pay a 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%.
      • cusoman, on 07/17/2008, -12/+23See, there's your problem America - you're paying 301.04% in income tax total!
      • xenuxenuts, on 07/17/2008, -6/+12What percentage of disposable income do the top 5% have? What percentage of the wealth?

        Those that benefit the most from system of government and style of economy will obviously pay the most. Perhaps if the very wealthy want to pay less taxes, they could work to have wages for the bottom 50% go up. Then you'll see them paying higher taxes. Maybe tell Paris Hilton to give her maid a raise.
      • Cayfox, on 07/17/2008, -3/+22That might be something to do with the top 10% controlling 90% of the country's wealth.
      • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -4/+15When the top 5% of "income" earners are making 50% of the income, they SHOULD be paying 50% of the taxes. Not a smaller percentage than everyone around them.

        And avoiding them entirely like this?

        They should be jailed. Anyone making less than $80k a year who did this would be.
      • Altotus, on 07/17/2008, -2/+14You can turn that around, though. The top 50% pay 10x as much tax as the lower 50%, but they have 20x as much money.

        In 2007, the average CEO received 520x the compensation that the average worker did. I work at a large (>3500 people) company, and out CEO makes only 150x what I make -- and I make about 3x what a guy in the warehouse or 4x what a guy in the mailroom makes.

        Taxation has such a skewed distribution because income has such a skewed distribution. I try to minimize my taxes by contributing pre-tax to retirement accounts and whatnot, but I don't do anything questionable. My nominal tax rate is something like 20%. I bet dollars to doughnuts that half the guys in the warehouse have a nominal tax rate higher than mine.
      • whorunbartertwn, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3>What percentage of disposable income do the top 5% have? <

        Well if we tax by disposable income you could have a 40k earner who scrimped to finish paying off their mortage, uses public transportation, and carries no debt paying more tax than a 300k earner who owns a really nice car and a mansion.

        Disposable income is a function of current income stream and financial obligations like utilities and debt, not a function of total net worth or salary.
      • dexedrine, on 07/17/2008, -2/+7as they should. this country has afforded them immeasurable wealth, they should pay the taxes on it....
      • geoffg, on 07/17/2008, -4/+2"See, there's your problem America - you're paying 301.04% in income tax total!"

        This explains everything.
      • calcio0fan, on 07/17/2008, -4/+1To the dumbass above-- it's not 301%... the top 5% is a subset of the top 10%, and so on
      • Kanele, on 07/18/2008, -0/+2To the dumbass above-- you fail at humor
    • RomeyRome, on 07/17/2008, -11/+9Should of done something more productive in your life then instead of whining about those that did. Don't think you would be complaining then.
    • whahaa, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3more rights for the slightly high!
  • kiwiboyus, on 07/17/2008, -12/+94I'm sure it was going to trickle down eventually... right?
    • OffPiste, on 07/17/2008, -11/+10Luckily for us it's the poor that start businesses and create jobs in America.
      • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -3/+8Too bad the jobs being created are in other countries.
      • pintomp3, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3luckily for who? aren't you in prison anyway?
    • geoffg, on 07/17/2008, -4/+3"I'm sure it was going to trickle down eventually... right?"

      Yeah, I mean the standard of living the poor endure in a country like Venezuela is so much higher then the standard of living enjoyed by the poor in America.
    • DeFex, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1it will trickle down to the arms companies and haliburton or whatever they call themselves now.
  • lazerus9, on 07/17/2008, -10/+16Start hanging and don't stop until the last of the criminal usury parasites are swinging!
    • lazerus9, on 07/17/2008, -3/+9....And hang the IRS as well!
    • Lawofnations, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2In the 1920's a group of German bankers were prosecuted for loaning out more paper money than they had on hand. They were found guilty and taken out to the Platz (square) and hung by the neck until dead.

      Today the Federal Reserve banking cartel loans out nine times it's reserves (fractional reserve banking). Once that is loaned out then nine times that amount is then loaned out (rehypothecation). Unfortunately congress agreed with the Fed that no officer or agent of the United States may review the actions of the Fed. They're all bought and paid for with paper money.
    • DeFex, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Don't the IRS terrorize some of you Americans?
      Im not sure what you call an organization that terrorizes people.
      • lazerus9, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1We just call it "the government" here.
  • 55mph, on 07/17/2008, -6/+25The NWO eats it's own.

    The only safe crook is the guy with immunity or the guy who has George Bush Sr. as his best friend. Ken Lay just had a Turkey Club sandwich and he's heading out to the back nine at some secret CIA resort, somewhere.
    • superfuxxorr, on 07/17/2008, -2/+11ken lay's dead.
      • DestroyFascism, on 07/17/2008, -2/+4I'll bet a 50 he turns up in 2010 and its in Belgium.
      • elhaf, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I'll bet two silver eagles he does not. Contact me again in 2010. I stipulate silver eagles, two of which are currently worth $50, because who knows what they'll be worth by 2010.
    • Lawofnations, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Ken Lay is in a cozy little 98,000 acre bungalow in Paraguay laughing his @** off.
      • 55mph, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1that's right!

        his suicide was a covert op.
  • Phillyz, on 07/17/2008, -3/+1320 BILLION DOLLARS?!?!?!
    • Altotus, on 07/17/2008, -1/+12They're US dollars. That's not as much money as you think it is (and it's less every day).
      • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Some of it might be. If I was hiding that much money, I'd have converted it to something a bit more stable.

        The taxes being calculated are being done in dollars with the compensatory equivalent in what was lost in the US, the currency itself may have been in any number of currencies, the article didn't get that detailed.
    • a2zb2b, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Yeah I know. It wouldn't have been such a big deal if it wasn't over 9000.
    • BedPost, on 07/17/2008, -0/+120,000,000,000/300,000,000 = $67 per US Citizen (if the summary is correct, I couldn't be bothered to read an ABC news article).

      $20 billion is a lot, but in the long run, it's not as much as it seems.
    • axelstudios, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4It's over 9,000!
    • moocow1452, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1That's a new shuffle!
    • FelixdaaHack, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4pffft...whats that like 5 min in Iraq spending
  • graddatadda, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5I'm pressin' charges!
    • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Not a chance. Though they deserve them.

      They'll walk. Money talks. And people with that much money have connections.

      They'll be "OJ'd".
      • asurroca, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Except OJ later lost a crapload of his money in the civil case. They won't even lose their money.... Therefore, they're getting SUPER OJ'd
  • simplyintricate, on 07/28/2008, -11/+6I do disagree with Income taxing (which causes the hiding of money) however. If the rich people have money, then they will provide jobs to the poor folks, in which they can climb up all the way to be rich.

    Feel free to argue with me
    • PicklesNCheese, on 07/24/2008, -3/+3Yes, the trickle down theory has totally worked in any of the nations where this archaic economic strategy has been employed. Not. I suggest taking a look at how badly this has failed in every country where it's been tried (check out the World Bank's record).
    • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -2/+5Been waiting for the "trickle down" since Reagan.

      Still not here. Is "Voo Doo Economics" a lie?
  • brainscab, on 07/17/2008, -8/+18'The concentration of wealth ebbs and flows. It naturally flows to the wealthy, but every once in a while it is forcefully taken from them and redistributed'
    Will Durant
  • ldw4686, on 07/17/2008, -1/+12I like how the article states that Lowy is currently out of the country. Well, that's convenient! I bet we won't see anytime soon
  • zacharytelschow, on 07/17/2008, -11/+23If I had oodles of money and the government was taking about half the money I earned in order on frivilious bullcrap while giving tax rebates to citizens who paid no taxes (see: "stimulous" package) I'd do everything I could to keep Uncle Sam's hand out of my pocket.
    • feoren, on 07/18/2008, -0/+2You don't have oodles of money, and the government is still taking a big chunk of it and spending it on frivolous bullcrap.
    • jonhoffm, on 07/18/2008, -1/+2Why would these people care if low income citizens who paid no taxes get a rebate check? Low income citizens will spend it and it's back in the wealthy's pocket anyway.
  • minoss, on 07/17/2008, -12/+24This is what happens when the government wants 50%+ of everything you make.
    • cryptomystic, on 07/17/2008, -8/+9In the immortal words of Ron Paul: "Abolish the Fed" !
      • Altotus, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7While abolishing the fed might have an interesting effect, I don't think it would prevent the government form wanting to take money away from you. Fed or no fed, they'll want the cash.

        Having Ron Paul as president, however, I can see how his downsizing plans would have an impact on driving down demand for tax money.
      • LeRenard, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7The Fed is not the same thing as the IRS, dips**t.
    • bierce, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1this is nothing. wait until BO raises taxes.
  • traceelemental, on 07/17/2008, -3/+70HOORAY for disgruntled IT workers!
    • asnaturalasgas, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Hilarious he gets rich off his efforts!! The uber rich probably aren't the best people to piss off though ...
    • imhalfpirate, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Totally! We know your deepest darkest secrets . . . or just the porn websites you visit during the job. The moral of the story: Don't piss us off!
  • alphonseragusa, on 07/17/2008, -15/+29Imagine if we didn't have income taxes...

    Rich people would keep their money in America. This money would be either in banks (preventing the mortgage crisis since banks would have some liquidity, i think?) or they would spend it on cars (which middle class people make), restaurants (where middle/lower class people work), homes (which middle class people build), etc.

    Trickle down works IF the rich actually spend their money. They won't spend it if they have no incentive!
    • BryanG412, on 07/17/2008, -13/+19False, trickle down doesn't work, hasn't worked, and will never work. It's kind of like communism, makes sense on paper, but doesn't work in the real world.
    • theutopian, on 07/17/2008, -1/+26Your argument is weak. The rich will keep their money where it will earn them the most money. If their money can make more in a European or Asian bank, that's where it will go. Don't assume money has national loyalties. Capital flows where it can earn the most.
    • Gev1982, on 07/17/2008, -3/+12Thanks for the update--I feel like I have just made contact with Reagans ghost--even though you are wrong. Rich people don't get richer by spending their money dude...they invest it and have it work for them...sometimes that means starting a business and employing people, but most of the time it means that they sit it in multiple accounts, gain interest, and use it to jet around the world while the rest of us live paycheck-to-paycheck--You should put down the glass of government kool-aid and look at what is really happening.
      • mbonnin, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3The rich are not your problem.. it's you. The system is not against you. You fully control and are responsible for your financial future. The day you understand that is the day you truly become free.

        But by all means, ignore my advice and continue ranting on digg about how the man is out to get you.
      • wettap, on 07/17/2008, -2/+1Typical wealth envy.

        Why do the rest of us live paycheck to paycheck? Because "we" didn't have the foresight and testicular fortitude to become entrepreneurs. We do not live paycheck to paycheck because some rich dude has all the money. Wealth is infinite.

        And the rich don't sit on their money. Not enough return on investment.
      • Gev1982, on 07/20/2008, -0/+0Wealth envy? Get over yourself. It is quite obvious that you have your mind set, with: "..."we" didn't have the foresight and testicular fortitude to become entrepreneurs".
    • BECoole, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3It works if they invest it too.
      Whether it is direct investments or placement with a bank or other investing company, investment is good. Very seldom does money end up hidden under a rock.
    • jer2eydevil88, on 07/17/2008, -5/+2The money is better spent on taxes where it goes into public works projects that benefit society and trickle down to the same middle class.
      • AbsurdParadox, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3How nice of you to decide how someone else's money is best spent.

        Now, using your logic, I could use some new shoes, and if you don't buy me any, I'm throwing you in jail.
      • wettap, on 07/18/2008, -0/+0How best to spend the wealth that I have earned, you ignoramus?

        Maybe I should purchase a SeaDoo so my family can have some wildass fun on the water this summer? WHO BUILDS THEM? Maybe I should take the family in an RV to Moab and Zion this summer? Nobody staffs the gas stations, tourist traps and restaurants that my family goes to? Maybe I should just sit home and wait for the Federal fuq-ups to figure out how to unclog a traffic jam? If they can't figure that out, why should I think they would know their ass from their elbow about what would REALLY benefit our society?
    • diggrnumber1, on 07/17/2008, -2/+1but if the rich save their money, it will add to investment, which will add to capital stock, which will increase our productivity and therefore our well-being.
      • calcio0fan, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Says the guy who just finished micro 101
    • rearlgrant, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5alphonseragusa - I actually can agree with you. What I'd add is this though.

      Free market economics as it has developed doesn't take into account psychology. The market in theory could behave rationally, but people almost always behave, to use the phrase, "predictably irrational" (google for the book cite).

      What I find intriguing is that Adam Smith actually wrote about this problem before Wealth of Nations. And I'd bet Euros for donuts that most people who quote Adam Smith have not read the book in which he created the phrase "invisible hand of the free market" (it wasn't Wealth of Nations). As well, he wrote that phrase in a growing age of republicanism (little 'r') when writers were hoping to advance free markets by basing them on "self-interest rightly understood." I'd argue that modern trickle-down economics has turned the phrase upside down, and I think Adam Smith would agree (if he were alive of course...)

      At some point, we should as a civilized people, consider whether an individual having millions/billions of dollars and putting it into investments/accounts overseas is dysfunctional to the "invisible hand of the free market" and "self-interest rightly understood."
      • alphonseragusa, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Woa - That's heavy for me. All I was trying to say is that I'd rather Tiger Woods buy a boat which was built and is cared for by middle class people than have Uncle Sam take half his money and give it to some bum on welfare or build more bombs with.

        Last week Boomer Esiason was on the radio and he said if Obama become Prez and raises his taxes, Boomer would have to lay off people who work for him. That can't be good, could it?
      • rearlgrant, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Check out this website. http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.ht ...

        What you'll see is that after $100,000, a person making $87,000 or less actually gives more of their income to the government than the person making $100,000.

        So Boomer can complain, but he's paying less tax as a percentage of income than his employees.

        Boomer's probably upset at the final dollar amount, but (to try and be funny) he's simply not able to buy another ivory backscratcher if his tax rate goes up. He can fire his employees if he'd prefer to spend the money on the backscratcher. He's really using the example of his employees as a way to cause fear while keeping more dollars for himself while his employees end up paying far more of their income in taxes.
  • pakruse, on 07/17/2008, -3/+5Crap. I have money in UBS. If they lose their license in the US, as the article suggests that they might, what exactly does that mean?
    • bsmeteronhigh2, on 07/17/2008, -3/+29U B Screwed
    • turdnack02, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5Actually what morons like bsmeteronhigh2 dont know is that you are completely fine. Your money is completely secure. This isnt like the case with IndyMac where they will go bankrupt and be taken over by the fed, this is simply a case of them "potentially" ( it will NEVER happen) losing their license to trade securities in the US market. It is still the largest wealth manager in the world and is a very liquid bank. If it ever happened, which it absolutely wont, UBS will most likely sell their US brokerage business to another firm and your assets will transfer to an account at that firm.

      You have nothing to worry about, this doesn't affect you at all.
    • Altotus, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5If they lose their license, they need to transfer your account to someone with a license.
  • richmomz, on 07/17/2008, -7/+21So you mean all those top 1% earners who supposidly pay all the taxes and create all of our jobs have actually been squirreling away their assets in shady overseas tax shelters while the middle class is left holding the bag?! That is absolutely unprecidentented in HISTORY - words cannot express how shocked I am that our financial elite are ripping us off. No, really!
    • InTheBurbs, on 07/17/2008, -3/+4No, the IRS is ripping you off. Just because you get robbed should everyone else too?
  • duggdowncatisad, on 07/17/2008, -7/+23Why would a super rich person who's already set for life many times over risk PMITA federal prison to get even more money? What, $100 million isn't enough, they'll only be happy if they have $200 million? Wtf.
    • canuck10101, on 07/17/2008, -8/+5Just because you don't have that kind of money, does it give you the right to say how much other people should have?
    • Tribis, on 07/17/2008, -4/+3They are still working for the money they are making and deserve to be compensated as long as they continue working . And most of the time what these people want is for their families to continue in prosperity for generations to come.

      At least that is what I would want with that amount of money.
      • barc0001, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3And as long as they play by the rules of the game, they have nothing to worry about. But if they enjoyed the benefits of their country while other people paid taxes and they didn't, that's a whole other issue.
      • Cybrwolf, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Quote: "And most of the time what these people want is for their families to continue in prosperity for generations to come."

        ***** that! Everyone's kids need to learn to make their own way!
        Just what the world needs, a entire country full of Paris Hiltons!
      • rearlgrant, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1There was a time when the abolishment of "fee tail" property distribution was so important, colonists took up arms to help abolish it.

        Now the same people who claim to carry the mantle of republicanism want to eliminate inheritance taxes.

        Washington, Jefferson and Adams would disagree. We know Jefferson did, because he at least wrote down his thoughts on the subject. http://www.conlaw.org/Intergenerational-II-2-4.htm
    • jub0r, on 07/17/2008, -2/+4They didn't become multi-millionaires by letting the government take all their money...
    • LeRenard, on 07/17/2008, -0/+6Billionaires seldom go to PMITA prison, even when they deserve to.
      • giggl3, on 07/17/2008, -1/+0Because they pay their way out, no one with deep pockets go to PMITA prison thats where us bottom feeders go. They just get a 1 way ticket to Hawaii to escape for a while.
  • gl77, on 07/17/2008, -1/+14"You and us..........UBS"
    • bjornski, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4The bank that hired Phil Gramm. Financial adviser to McCain and one of the key architects of the Enron Loophole.

      And Phil has more plans for the American economy, too! And remember! You have no right whining as he makes himself and his friends incredibly wealthy!
    • diggingaround, on 07/18/2008, -0/+2UBS = "U Be Screwed"
  • bsmeteronhigh2, on 07/17/2008, -0/+11So, now that the folks with all the power are under the watchful eye of the IRS, perhaps they can change the IRS. It could never happen otherwise. Here's hoping that some elected officials are caught up in it, too. Now that would be funny.
    • serif69, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1That wouldn't be funny, it would be predictable.
  • StupotAce, on 07/17/2008, -3/+6I don't feel that hiding money would fall under the idea of "right to privacy".
    This situation is like hiding a corpse of someone you killed and complaining when your gardener turned you in after he saw the body, dispite the fact that he promised not to tell.

    Two wrongs don't make a right, they just make it more complicated as to what blame resides with which party.
  • h3lx, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7May be they're trying to recoup some of the 20 or so some odd billions they simply 'lost' in Iraq.
    Or any number of the millions misplaced over Katrina.

  • BuzzFriendly, on 07/17/2008, -6/+28When I think of hiding money it is so thieves don’t steal from me. Looks like they were doing the same thing.
  • dcherryholmes, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3The Italians are said to have published the names, but the website is gone. And it's not clear from what I've read whether it was just Italian citizens, or the whole list. Does anyone have it, or know where it can be gotten?
  • borez, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2That IT guy may receive billions for being a grass, but...piss people with that much money off, and I'm damn sure they'll find you eventually.
  • Cadenzah, on 07/17/2008, -5/+10"hid as much $20 billion belonging to US citizens"
    If they didn't do anything criminal, their money rightfully belongs to them....
    • Soljer, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3That's the whole point, they did do something illegal: tax fraud. By hiding their money in these banks, they were also hiding their income (the money came from somewhere), by hiding their income they did not pay taxes on it. The reference to the $20 billion belonging to the US citizens was referring to the tax dollars not paid by those hiding their income. In theory, tax dollars are for the benefit of the citizens in general. Thus, the taxes paid every year by everyone is everyone's $.
    • FlaNative, on 07/17/2008, -1/+0If they were not doing anything wrong, they have nothing to hide.
      But wait....
  • insonh, on 07/17/2008, -5/+21the Big Dig tunnel in Boston was suppose to cost 3 billion

    as of today its now up too 22 billion dollars

    for 8 miles of road that kills people and floods

    75% of which has to be paid by the people of Massachusetts


    you may now rant about how its greedy evil republicans who hid this money in Liechtenstein from this article
  • InTheBurbs, on 07/17/2008, -7/+19Before anyone starts ranting about the evil rich, ask yourselves this. If you had the wealth, the resources and the know-how to stash some money away and avoid taxes wouldn't you do it too?
    • 33PercentGod, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4I'm not a *****,so probably not.
    • Gudeldar, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2If I had anywhere near the amount of money they had why the ***** would I break the law just to avoid paying the relatively mild (compared to Europe) 34% income tax on my money.
      • InTheBurbs, on 07/18/2008, -1/+2Because it's your money that you worked for? But if you want to loose it that's fine, just don't presume to tell others what to do with their money. We all have our definition of how much is "enough".
    • CiXeL, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1no, im not corrupt. id probably live like warren buffet since i only want enough money to be comfortable and pursue my hobbies
    • workfaster, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I wonder if any of these people consider themselves patriotic. If they illegally avoided paying taxes, they're un-American traitors. We can complain about taxes, and pressure our politicians to spend them wisely, but not paying your taxes is simply unacceptable.
      • InTheBurbs, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1The Revolutionary War was fought in large part out of a refusal to pay taxes. Perhaps George Washington should have been patriotic and just coughed up. After all, he was good for it. Jefferson less so.
    • feoren, on 07/18/2008, -0/+2No, I wouldn't. If I had hundreds of millions of dollars, I already could buy everything I want in life. Of course, the fact that I wouldn't be a total prick and ***** others over to cheat the system is precisely the reason I will never have hundreds of millions of dollars.
  • WiLLGT09, on 07/17/2008, -2/+7If these people used illegal means to get their money into these banks, then of course they should be charged. But, as far as I know, it's perfectly legal to have assets in foreign banks, right?
    • BeforeSputnik, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Yes, but you have to report it (and it's earnings). They weren't.
    • dexedrine, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2The problem is that they didn't declare the the money. Yes, you can keep your money anywhere you want. You still have to pay taxes on it accordingly.
    • FlaNative, on 07/17/2008, -2/+0Work makes Free!
    • WiLLGT09, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1ahh, I see now. thanks.
  • morgino, on 07/17/2008, -3/+3This guy from Lichtenschtein should get his ass kissed from our govt for giving us these names. Please justice system work and get this money back! I can't wait to see this list of the whos who of douchebags. Serioulsy, a 50% penalty on half of the savings of 20 billion? Thats not chump change, that's like a week in Iraq!
    • Cybrwolf, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I agree I have to pay taxes, on my little 50K a year. Let these bastards, loose 10 billion as a fine!
    • Polarize, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1@morgino:

      Sarcasm?
  • uselessexpert, on 07/17/2008, -3/+7FTA "Bob Bennett, a lawyer for Lowy, who is a prominent contributor to both Democratic and Republican candidates, told ...."

    What does that have to do with any of this?
    • alexanEmpire, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Shows that both parties are in the pockets of these criminals.
    • exgop, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Bob Bennett was Clinton's lawyer during blowjob fiasco
  • chrisk9, on 07/17/2008, -0/+11Update: UBS to stop offshore banking for U.S. residents
    http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/080717/ubs_taxevasion.html
    "Swiss bank UBS will no longer provide offshore banking and securities services to U.S. residents through its branches, a UBS executive said on Thursday."
    • dexedrine, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1little too late to start back-pedalling.....
  • grey580, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4He's as good as dead.
  • BECoole, on 07/17/2008, -2/+18Any time great quantities of cash are amassed thieves will be attracted. Whether it's $100 in a ghetto sock, a million in an millionaire's fund, or the billions in all of our collective 401Ks, thieves will come and try to take it. Usually that thief is someone representing the Gov't.
  • Kristijan12, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2A farse.
  • Gimpyfuzznut, on 07/17/2008, -6/+8But you're damn right the IRS is going to go after Wesley Snipes for not paying his taxes! A black guy not paying his taxes? ***** NO!

    If its white, its all right!
    God bless Amerikka!
    • Soljer, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2I am not sure race has anything to do with this story. Do not confuse race with wealth.
      • Gimpyfuzznut, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Well the comment was meant as a little bit of a joke - obviously borrowing from Chris Rock. But seriously, while the race card doesn't come directly into play, it is safe to assume that these super rich crooks are white. I don't mean just their skin color - they are what you would call "white men", the people in charge, the people in power.
    • Troy64, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Wesley should of had a better banker/broker.
  • asdfva, on 07/17/2008, -9/+7I hope that catch that rat snitch and make sure he never sees the light of day again. It's weak minded people like that, that deserve harsh punishments. Now he's getting rich off of dropping dimes and doing radio and tv interviews. The IRS is GIVING him upwards of 30% of what they take from the people, who rightfully protected their own investments. STOP SNITCHING!


    • Blg7, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Haha. The weak minded are the ones who are so insecure they fight tooth and nail against any meaningful support of their country. People who think they have the right to work and earn in the national economy without giving back a cent to the country that gave them their opportunities are not "rightfully" protecting their investments, they are criminals. Or did they not use the public road system? Maybe they went without running water and sewage? What about national defense? I guess people like you wouldn't have a problem if someone broke into your house, since you probably have a private police force? When a fire starts on their property - do you think they put it out with buckets from the river? Your a jackass.
    • rearlgrant, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1asdfva -- lol
  • iddybiddy, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Wow I could of sworn Lowey was Australian, his old man is definitely Australian.. anyways I wonder how many Bush Library donors are on that list.
    • rearlgrant, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1There is a theory above that most on the list are Democratic donors.

      We'll see. It will be interesting to find out.
  • odigity, on 07/17/2008, -8/+11Good. I'd rather the rich keep their money than hand it over to government. They can't possibly put it to worse uses than our government.

    Besides... it's THEIR ***** money. Or have we lost all respect for property rights? The way many of you are carrying on like IRS cheerleaders terrifies me.
    • Augie1969, on 07/17/2008, -1/+14I hate the IRS as much as anybody. But if we have to pay this *****, so do they. ***** em!

      :)
    • Cybrwolf, on 07/17/2008, -1/+9***** those rich bastards! I have to pay taxes, well so do they!
      • exgop, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1top 1% of wage earners pay 40% of all income taxes. Nice try commie
  • dexedrine, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2No wonder UBS has been doing so well. I noticed them several years ago during one of the tennis Grand Slams. To go from no where to absolutely piercing the market, I wondered if they were up to something *shifty eyes*
  • Schmich, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3They should have chosen a Swiss bank instead!
  • frankengeek, on 07/17/2008, -5/+12Super rich - that comment in itself is biased. It suggests that your a blood sucking greedy evil tax evader. It's revealing of those that assume everyone on that list is guilty of tax evasion. It's really class envy, and this it the hallmark of socialism. Without the super rich we wouldn't have jobs, etc. I applaud them to avoid paying taxes - we all (US citizens) do it every time we file. The 16th amendment was never ratified anyway. The IRS is nothing more than thug trying to invent ways to extract all our cash so that our huge bureaucracy can push it's agenda.
    • Blg7, on 07/17/2008, -2/+4"Without the super rich we wouldn't have jobs, etc. "

      *rolls eyes*

      You can't be serious. There wouldn't be jobs if no single person had billions of dollars? Riiiiiight. Someone drank a little too much conservative Kool-aid.
  • FlaNative, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5I am sure some will claim "Executive Privilege"....
  • FlaNative, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4How much you want to bet Karl Rove closed accounts for some friends before this went public.
    That's why he needed to leave so suddenly....
  • jinchoung, on 07/17/2008, -3/+5when the revolution comes, they'll be the first against the wall.
    • AbsurdParadox, on 07/17/2008, -6/+7Wow, you want to kill people because they refused to let their own property be stolen?

      How do you sleep at night?
    • Cybrwolf, on 07/17/2008, -4/+1Brother, you got that right!
    • budsstud26, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3screw you all...when the revolution comes, we'll be long gone :-)
    • personalj, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2More like, they'll hire ex military guys and Law Enforcement to keep themselves safe and kill you mindless sheep who come to take what is theirs.
    • thecoolestguy, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1because they don't want to give their money to the even richer billionaires who own the government? If the revolution comes, the patriotic rich will be our greatest allies.
    • Chrontius, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1What is it that makes the distinction between a revolutionary rabble and a state?
    • exgop, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1No it will be ACLU lawyer lined up first.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.