^ eh, there are certainly many problems. But the opposite situation, with no agency law making, is also problematic due to gridlock and less flexibility. You could end up with fewer rules, but worse ones that are harder to change. It's incumbent on the legislature to write better grants of authority more clearly delineating agency power, else it's left to agencies and the courts to sort out what the legislature meant. Perhaps ironically, it was guys like Scalia that championed agency deference (courts deferring to agencies reasonable interpretations of statutes or regulations), although he might have come to regret that.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Yes they just need to be more efficient. The sheer volume of things being regulated is just staggering. Hows a layperson supposed to know the law? Even better, hows a non specialized attorney even supposed to know the law anymore?
^ because a long time ago the legislative branch gave agencies the power of rule making, by which agencies effectively fill in the details of legislative enactments. As long as the rule is within the legislatively delegated power, the agency can issue the rule (with certain other caveats).
The vast majority of the population know absolutely nothing about agency rulemaking. They think Treasury just issues laws on their own and usurps the legislative branch. Bill Cosby likely falls into that group.
Got it. Treasury Regulations can't be challenged. And if the Treasury decides to take a look at a taxpayer, think, "I don't like what you're doing," they should be able to specifically tailor regulations that look to past conduct so as to blow up the current contemplated transaction.
Congress should just replace the entire Internal Revenue Code with a blanket grant of authority to the Treasury to promulgate regulations and do what the hell they want.
Going to be a contested/brokered GOP convention in July. More fireworks than the 4th of July.
Congress is bought and sold by the very companies you expect them to rule fairly over. So naturally they stood idle while corporations bolted for off shore tax havens.
Not remotely what I said or implied. People can, and do, bring separation of powers challenges (agency usurping legislature's authority) to agency actions all the time. I'm working on one right now, in fact. But the relevant question is whether the rule making was within the delegated powers. Just because an agency is making rules doesn't mean it's engaging in law making reserved for the legislature. Thought I read on corporate inversions that the ability to invert for tax purposes was based on existing regulations, not laws, but it's been a while.
Interesting. It's almost like I was implying the treasury was engaging in law making reserved for the legislature when I said, "why not leave the law making up to the legislative branch."
In the future, I'll proofread my posts a few times to hopefully prevent your response issues with the semantics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/b...reasury-department-drops-the-gloves.html?_r=0
Agreed. Trump gonna get mad and run 3rd party I bet.
Question is, will the Dems have a contested convention too?
What would be positively mind-blowing is if Trump AND Sanders both ran as independents in November. That scenario, while unlikely, would make the fall campaign must-follow stuff.
Don't think he really wants to run under one of the first 2 parties, much less attempt the incredible hard work & huge $$$ needed to do a relevant 3rd party run like Perot did in '92.
Not sure how accurate this is, but New York and Vermont have banned "official travel" to Mississippi over LGBT law.
hahaha smh
From one extreme group to another. jesus christ I hate Americans
hahaha smh
From one extreme group to another. jesus christ I hate Americans
Oh and the Panama Papers that no one is talking about is implicating 1,000 American companies who are tax avoiders.
2 of which have ties to Hillary Clinton.
Dis gonna git goooood.
2 of which have ties to Hillary Clinton.
Dis gonna git goooood.
Sadly, thats close to being true. The general public have no idea how badly theyre getting screwed on this stuff. There are regulations for everything, and theyre made by people the general public dont elect or get to hold accountable.
Nothing shows people how accepting you are like immediately exiling them lol.
Another interesting thought, I wonder if this is constitutional? Nothing really stands out as being unconstitutional. Maybe negative implication of the commerce clause? It just sounds....wrong.
Tax avoidance is smart, perfectly legal and good business.
If you deduct anything on your tax return, you're a tax avoider.
Tax evasion is illegal and should be punished.
Showing up in the Panama Papers does not necessarily mean anyone was doing anything illegal.
If you deduct anything on your tax return, you're a tax avoider.
Tax evasion is illegal and should be punished.
Showing up in the Panama Papers does not necessarily mean anyone was doing anything illegal.
I meant, tax evasion. tax avoidance is smart. My bad. Thanks for clarifying that.
But the panama papers have exposed a lot of illegal tax evasion. think it's called a Double Irish with a Dutch sandwich.
RNC chair very coy with Hannity last night about a contested convention and Kasich, that the GOP nominee will be 'somebody who is running'.
Why do I get the feeling that he (probably others), would like to put together a Kasich/Rubio ticket at the convention, given that Rubio wants to hang on to his delegates for the convention. Weird stuff going on.
Why do I get the feeling that he (probably others), would like to put together a Kasich/Rubio ticket at the convention, given that Rubio wants to hang on to his delegates for the convention. Weird stuff going on.
Official state paid travel is all this applies to...
That said...WTF is wrong with pretty much the whole South? State after state legislatures are passing these "anti-gay religious freedom" and "bathroom" bills despite the fact that a) the AGs of the states are telling the legislatures that they won't stand behind the bills and that they have zero chance of standing up to any court challenge.
Absolute political pandering at its worst.
You don't think NY and Vermont are politically pandering too?
Like I said, from one extreme to another. No middle ground.
For real...although I'm guessing that they will go for someone who isn't currently running.
Along that same line...a woman who my wife runs in the mornings with, her husband is a secret service agent and he is saying that they, the Secret Service are being prepared for Joe Biden to end up as the Democratic nominee.
Can anyone imagine the political climate that will exist if in November we have two hand picked party candidates, neither who went through the primary process?
Good Lord things are fu@#ed!
Yes, it is all pandering Willy. However, I'm not from NY or VT...I consider myself a southerner and so while the stupidity of "my people" isn't surprising, it is quite disappointing.
looking fairly likely anyway - and it's hard to envision anything coming out of that which might lead to a defeat of Hillary Clinton.
Lol what's that even mean?
Im just sick of people and their fn feelings. Can we make having feelings illegal?
Are we sure it's even gonna be Hillary? She's having trouble winning primaries lately.......
It means NY and Vermont are equally childish.
I'm sick of people and their feelings too Mash. Absolutely sick of it.
Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich is (for now) also a perfectly legal method of tax avoidance.
The Panama Papers may tell us that someone had a shell company set up they paid "consulting fees" to, although that company had no employees or assets. Or maybe, somebody's company got some sort of loan that was suspiciously never paid back, and no income was recorded for forgiveness. Anything you could think of, really. Look up Vladimir Putin's violin playing friend. They had a bunch of scheme's set up.
There are perfectly legal reasons why some people would want to have assets in companies that can't directly be tied back to them. But there are also incredibly illegal reasons.
I agree the religious freedom stuff is legal garbage. But whats wrong with the bathroom bills?
Gotcha. Thanks for info.
Just read where Ireland made that double irish and scotch sandwich illegal on October 14th. Are there other countries that still have it legal?
I guess it could be now. I don't really keep up much on it. I'm not at one of the Big 4, so there's likely never going to be a scenario that arises where it would be cost efficient for a client to try and do some convoluted international IP licensing structure.
I think they originally grandfathered the existing structures in when they started to try and curb them.
There's a huge international push right now to curb international tax avoidance.
I think they originally grandfathered the existing structures in when they started to try and curb them.
There's a huge international push right now to curb international tax avoidance.
Im sure that's true. Gotta stop people from trying to keep too much of their own money. Cutting spending is totally out of the question.
Said it over and again - we're a few years away from an Atlas Shrugged event where the producers just stop.
Agreed bigblueinsanity. The whole 'eventually running out of other people's money' comes to mind.
Pfizer was gonna buy out Allgeran and walked away from the deal because they couldn't lower their taxes in Ireland.
"producers just stop(ping)" is a near impossible event. Producers still have to eat, maintain shelter and stay clothed. Producers will have assets that will need protecting. Add the fact that one producer stopping creates opportunity for the next producer...so if you want to stop, go ahead. Nobody is irreplaceable.
There is a large shared cost to providing profitable markets from which producers profit. Somebody had to pay to build the roads and provide the infrastructure upon which business is built. Pay to keep the shipping lines open and safe for commerce. Somebody has to pay to educate the people that businesses hire. There are medical costs to treat people who are poisoned by industrial by-products. There are costs to the unintended consequences of things like industrial pollution, over-prescribed opioids, and antibiotics and other drugs, etc.
We can all debate just how those costs should be divvied up...but they are all real.
