• Norman Finkelstein sur X :
    https://twitter.com/normfinkelstein/status/1767578915340460112

    UN Special Representative Pramila Patten states in her report that her mission viewed fully 5,000 photographs and 50 hours of footage of the October 7 attack supplied to her by the Israeli government and available in open sources. This digital evidence, from every conceivable angle and by every conceivable electronic device (bodycams, dashcams, individual cellphones, CCTV, and traffic surveillance cameras) DIDN’T YIELD ONE SINGLE IMAGE OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE. The report also states that it COULDN’T LOCATE ANY FORENSIC EVIDENCE of sexual violence. The report also states that it was UNABLE TO MEET A SINGLE SURVIVOR of sexual violence on October 7. What does Patten then conclude? “There are reasonable grounds to believe that multiple incidents of rape, including gang rape, occurred.” Isn’t it time for UN Secretary-General Guterres to appoint a Special Representative to investigate Pramila Patten?

  • Je crois que #Goebbels peut aller se rhabiller

    Marc Owen Jones sur X :
    https://twitter.com/marcowenjones/status/1767493669790077050

    This is obviously an Israeli state encouraged campaign (published by official accounts like @Israel and @EylonyLevy ) and pro-Israel Disinfluencers like @visegrad24. Someone from the @FDD even chimed in.

    They are trying to monopolise, dominate, and appropriate the meaning of ’red-hands’, (they’re not even red they’re actually orange) as being a sinister or callous attack on Israel. In fact, coloured hands (red or otherwise) have been used in multiple protest movements across the world, from campaigns against child soldiers to violence against indigenous women. It’s a good example of the epistemic violence being waged by Israel.

    They’re trying to prescribe their own subjectivity to have an objective, universal and singular meaning- in this case, a symbol advocating peace as being tacitly supporting or ’reminding’ people of killing Jews and Israelis.

    The pin could have been a rabid badger and propagandists would have somehow found a way to trace its meaning back to being a celebration of ’terror’ or criticism of Israel. The simple fact of the matter is that Israel’s hasbara is raging that high profile celebrities are calling for a ceasefire, and must be smeared, disparaged, and made to feel antisemitic.

    TLDR; Israeli propaganda is trying to redirect focus from the campaign’s call for a ceasefire and make it about how Israel is the real victim of the campaign. They really hate high profile criticism of the IDF’s genocidal campaign

  • Gaza medics tell BBC that Israeli troops beat and humiliated them after hospital raid
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68513408

    Ahmed Abu Sabha, a doctor at Nasser hospital, described being held for a week in detention, where, he said, muzzled dogs were set upon him and his hand was broken by an Israeli soldier.

    His account closely matches those of two other medics who wanted to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals.

    They told the BBC they were humiliated, beaten, doused with cold water, and forced to kneel in uncomfortable positions for hours. They said they were detained for days before being released.

    The BBC supplied details of their allegations to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). They did not respond directly to questions about these accounts, or deny specific claims of mistreatment. But they denied that medical staff were harmed during their operation.

    They said that “any abuse of detainees is contrary to IDF orders and is therefore strictly prohibited”.

    #sionisme #criminel #mensonger

    • Les camions sont entrés dans Gaza, toutefois non pas pour extraire les blessés et les martyrs des décombres. Non, les familles doivent déterrer leurs morts à mains nues.

      Ce mécanisme vise à mettre en œuvre le corridor maritime américain et à imposer une base militaire américano-israélienne.

    • https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1767098823636046322.html

      America’s goal in establishing a seaport is primarily military & political, not humanitarian:
      – Gain control over Gaza’s gas resources
      – Establish US-Israel military presence
      – Dismantle UNRWA & have aid distributed through local militias.
      – Isolate Gaza from the Palestinian body
      Gaza City has a long history as a crossroad of regional trade & travel. As a port city, Gaza was a stop on the Incense Road. In more recent history, until WWI, Gaza seaport was a main hub for import & export trade to southern Palestine, & its hinterland, including Jordan and Iraq
      Since 1967, Israel has exercised full control of Gaza’s 43km coastline and territorial waters, blocking ships from reaching the city. Gaza seaport is the only Mediterranean port closed to shipping, because of Israeli colonization and continued destruction.
      Between 1967 and 1994, the existing infrastructure was severely neglected. Railways, air and seaports were no longer at the free disposal of Palestinians and were only there to serve Israel, its army and its settlers.
      As part of the 1993 Oslo Accords, the Netherlands & France governments committed $42.8m to the reconstruction of the Gaza seaport and to the training of port personnel. A Dutch-French consortium that specialises in seaports signed a construction contract in July 2000 with the PA.
      The seaport was scheduled to be completed by August 2002. But Israel being Israel, in 2000, Israel halted any construction & in 2002, Israeli navy attacked the PA naval patrol boats in Gaza, causing extensive damage and no further implementation of the project was allowed.
      Since 2007, Israel has repeatedly bombed Gaza’s seaport, which only now serves Palestinian fishermen. It has repeatedly shot & killed fishermen and destroyed their boats. Israel is also imposing a maritime sea blockade on Gaza for more than 60 years. Israel is cutting life short.
      In June 2010 the EU Parliament urged EU Member States to “take steps to ensure the sustainable opening of all the crossing points to and from Gaza, including the port of Gaza, with adequate international end-use monitoring”.
      Establishing a maritime window from Gaza to the outside world is possible, if the focus is put on ending Israel’s state violence, war crimes & genocide. What the Americans are now doing isn’t providing LIFE to Palestinians, but actually entrenching Israeli colonization.

    • Il me semble que @gonzo avait référencé le plan (considéré alors comme extrémiste) selon lequel les israéliens voulaient construire un tel « terminal portuaire ». Et c’était dans les premières semaines des bombardements.

      Quelqu’un retrouverait ça ?

  • Le nietzschéisme social
    https://laviedesidees.fr/Porcher-La-question-Nietzsche

    Peut-on faire de #Nietzsche un penseur du social ? Entre #critique sociale et critique du social, les traditions herméneutiques de France et d’Allemagne qui ont pu se réclamer de lui invitent à réviser le jugement hâtif que certaines lectures marxistes ou anti-postmodernes ont accréditées. À propos de : Frédéric Porcher, La « question-Nietzsche ». Les normes au carrefour du vital et du social, Vrin

    #Philosophie #Double_Une
    https://laviedesidees.fr/IMG/docx/202403_nietzscheisme.docx
    https://laviedesidees.fr/IMG/docx/20240312_nietzscheisme.docx
    https://laviedesidees.fr/IMG/pdf/20240312_nietzscheisme.pdf

    • L’État s’attaque à l’évasion fiscale (spoiler : non)
      La chronique de Waly Dia - 10 mars 2024
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jebqxDgDn2g

      Waly Dia commente l’actualité, entre l’IVG inscrite dans la Constitution, le décompte des morts à Gaza, Macron qui veut la guerre avec la Russie ou Aya Nakamura aux JO. Mais l’information la plus importante à retenir, selon lui, c’est la réduction des dépenses de l’État concernant tous les secteurs.

  • Gaza : à Amsterdam, des manifestants protestent contre la présence du président israélien
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2024/03/10/gaza-a-amsterdam-des-manifestants-protestent-contre-la-presence-du-president

    Isaac Herzog était venu assister à l’inauguration, dimanche, d’un nouveau Musée national de l’Holocauste.

    Rien sur sa rencontre avec Geert Wilders

    Geert Wilders sur X :

    “I just had a great meeting in Amsterdam with the President of Israel Isaac_Herzog. I told him I am proud that he visits the Netherlands and that Israel has, and always will have, my full support in its fight against terror. #Israel #Herzog” / X

    https://twitter.com/geertwilderspvv/status/1767084417455960177

  • إسرائيل تدرس تعيين مدير مخابرات السلطة الفلسطينية حاكما لغزة بعد انتهاء الحرب | أخبار | الجزيرة نت
    https://www.aljazeera.net/news/2024/3/12/%d8%a5%d8%b3%d8%b1%d8%a7%d8%a6%d9%8a%d9%84-%d8%aa%d8%af%d8%b1%d8%b3-%d8%a

    Comment mieux faire passer l’Autorité palestinienne pour un nid de collabos ? Les Israéliens souhaiteraient placer à Gaza Majed Faraj, le chef des renseignements à Ramallah.

  • Brianna Keilar sur X :
    https://twitter.com/brikeilarcnn/status/1766198596863484142

    It’s hard to comprehend the deaths of 12,800 children. We put up figures of children on our studio walls - one for each child killed in Gaza during the war.

    They’re dying from airstrikes and now malnutrition and dehydration.

    These are some of their stories.

    https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1766198141982769152/vid/avc1/640x360/e03jGDoDSDOwYrZz.mp4?tag=16

  • John Barnett, lanceur d’alerte chez Boeing qui avait soulevé des inquiétudes sur la production, retrouvé mort | Actualités mondiales ► Yourtopia
    https://www.yourtopia.fr/john-barnett-lanceur-dalerte-chez-boeing-qui-avait-souleve-des-inquietudes

    John Barnett, ancien employé de Boeing et lanceur d’alerte sur les normes de production de l’entreprise, a été retrouvé mort aux États-Unis, selon des rapports médiatiques. Barnett, qui avait travaillé pour Boeing pendant 32 ans avant de prendre sa retraite en 2017, avait exprimé des préoccupations concernant la sécurité des avions produits par l’entreprise.

    Boeing whistleblower found dead in US - BBC News
    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68534703

    Boeing said it was saddened to hear of Mr Barnett’s passing. The Charleston County coroner confirmed his death to the BBC on Monday.

    It said the 62-year-old had died from a “self-inflicted” wound on 9 March and police were investigating.

  • France : second exportateur mondial d’armes ! Les autorités se dérobent à leurs obligations de contrôle démocratique et de transparence. Jusqu’à quand ?
    https://www.obsarm.info/spip.php?article644

    Selon le dernier communiqué du Sipri, la France s’élève au rang de deuxième exportateur d’armes au monde après les États-Unis. L’augmentation des exportations d’armes est faramineuse : plus de 47 % entre les périodes 2014-2018 et 2019-2023. Alors que la contestation monte contre les ventes d’armes et de composants à double usage à Israël et à la Russie, le gouvernement fait traîner la mise en place de la Commission parlementaire d’évaluation de la politique d’exportation d’armement. (...) #Armements

    / Transferts / exportations, #Contrôle_des_exportations, #Biens_à_double_usage, #Droit_international_humanitaire, #Actions_contre_la_guerre, La (...)

    #Transferts_/_exportations #La_une
    https://www.obsarm.info/IMG/pdf/cp_france_second_exportateur_2024-02-11.pdf

  • Cerveaux non disponibles
    @CerveauxNon
    https://twitter.com/CerveauxNon/status/1767100096015974713

    "Nous refusons que notre judéité et l’Holocauste soient récupérés pour justifier une occupation qui a conduit à des conflits pour tant d’innocents… »

    Très fort discours du réalisateur Jonathan Glazer après son Oscar du meilleur film étranger pour "La Zone D’intérêt"

    https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1767100053812813824/pu/vid/avc1/320x568/xogGJE6lYpwcieWR.mp4?tag=12


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsRm8tPROv8

    #Oscar

    • Et bien sûr l’incomparable malhonnêteté sioniste en roue libre

      Batya Ungar-Sargon sur X :
      https://twitter.com/bungarsargon/status/1767002321051955202

      I simply cannot fathom the moral rot in someone’s soul that leads them to win an award for a movie about the Holocaust and with the platform given to them, to accept that award by saying, “We stand here as men who refute their Jewishness.”

      Jusqu’à mettre un point après le dernier mot.

    • Pour rappel, et pour la bonne bouche, voici comment Le Monde avait évoqué le fait que des gens avaient osé dénoncer le génocide à Gaza lors du festival de Berlin, fin février 2024 :

      https://www.lemonde.fr/culture/article/2024/02/26/la-berlinale-dans-la-tourmente-apres-des-propos-sur-israel-lors-de-la-remise

      La controverse a été alimentée notamment par des déclarations de cinéastes samedi soir, lors de la cérémonie du palmarès, accusant Israël de génocide en raison des bombardements qui ont fait près de 30 000 morts à Gaza, en majorité des civils, selon le ministère de la santé du Hamas – un chiffre non vérifiable de source indépendante, qui inclurait civils comme combattants.

      Dans le même temps, ces metteurs en scène n’ont pas mentionné que l’offensive israélienne avait été déclenchée par une attaque sans précédent menée le 7 octobre par le Hamas contre Israël, causant la mort d’au moins 1 160 personnes, en majorité des civils.

      On avait un fil là-dessus ici :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/1043347

      Du coup, je suis curieux de savoir si Jonathan Glazer avait déjà fait connaître sa position sur Gaza auparavant, ou bien si c’est une « surprise » pour les Oscars.

    • Jonathan Glazer Was Right: Jewishness and the Holocaust Have Been Hijacked by the Occupation
      Haaretz Editorial | Mar 13, 2024
      https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/2024-03-13/ty-article-opinion/jonathan-glazer-was-right-jewishness-and-the-holocaust-were-hijacked-by-the-occupation/0000018e-3477-d9f7-a5ee-f6ff5da40000

      Every few days the country is rocked by the remarks of some person or another condemning Israel’s actions. The latest storm was provoked by the British Jewish director Jonathan Glazer, whose film “The Zone of Interest” won the Oscar this week for best international film.

    • La remise des Oscars permet un sursaut d’humanité face au génocide à Gaza
      https://www.chroniquepalestine.com/remise-oscars-permet-sursaut-humanite-face-genocide-gaza
      13 mars 2024 | Par Jonathan Cook | 11 mars 2024 – Transmis par l’auteur – Traduction : Chronique de Palestine – Dominique Muselet

      C’est pourquoi les influenceurs juifs se sont empressés de salir Glazer en le qualifiant de juif qui se hait lui-même et en déformant ses propos – en supprimant notamment les éléments qui ne correspondaient pas à leur programme intéressé et anti-universel.

      Faisant référence aux victimes du 7 octobre et de l’attaque israélienne contre Gaza, Glazer a déclaré au public des Oscars : « En ce moment, nous sommes ici en tant qu’hommes et en tant que femmes : En ce moment même, nous sommes ici en tant qu’hommes qui s’opposent au détournement de leur judéité et de l’Holocauste par un régime d’occupation qui a provoqué la mort de tant d’innocents ».

      Il s’opposait expressément à ce que sa judéité soit utilisée pour soutenir un génocide.

      Il s’est démarqué de nombreux dirigeants et personnalités influentes de la communauté juive qui ont utilisé leur propre judéité pour justifier la violence contre les civils. Il nous rappelait que la leçon de l’Holocauste est que les idéologies ne doivent jamais l’emporter sur notre humanité, ne doivent jamais être utilisées pour rationaliser le mal.

      Tout cela représente une énorme menace pour les membres de la communauté juive qui, depuis des décennies, utilisent précisément leur judéité à des fins politiques, pour servir Israël et son projet d’expulser le peuple palestinien de sa patrie historique.
      La vraie dépravation morale

      Dans un élan de pure inversion accusatoire, par exemple, le rabbin Shmuley Boteach, surnommé par les médias « le rabbin le plus célèbre d’Amérique », a fustigé Glazer pour avoir soi-disant « exploité l’Holocauste » et pour avoir banalisé « la mémoire des 6 millions de victimes grâce auxquelles il a trouvé la gloire à Hollywood ».

      Boteach ne peut apparemment pas comprendre que c’est lui, et non Glazer, qui exploite l’Holocauste – dans son cas, depuis des décennies pour protéger Israël de toute critique, même maintenant qu’il commet un génocide.

      Batya Ungar-Sargon, journaliste d’opinion à Newsweek, a, quant à elle, rompu avec toutes les règles déontologiques du journalisme pour déformer complètement le discours de Glazer, l’accusant d’être une « pourriture morale » pour avoir soi-disant renié sa judéité.

      Alors qu’en fait, comme il l’a très bien expliqué, il rejetait, au contraire, la façon dont son appartenance à la communauté juive et l’Holocauste ont été détournés par des apologistes du génocide tels qu’Ungar-Sargon pour promouvoir un programme idéologique violent.

      La rédactrice en chef de Newsweek sait que le discours de Glazer a été le moment le plus écouté et le plus discuté de la cérémonie des Oscars. La plupart de ceux qui ont lu le commentaire de Ungar-Sargon sur Twitter avaient entendu ce que Glazer a dit dans son discours et savaient qu’elle mentait.

      De pareilles accusations mensongères auraient dû avoir des conséquences destructrices sur sa carrière professionnelles. Elles auraient dû être une tache sombre sur sa crédibilité journalistique. Et pourtant, Mme Ungar-Sargon a fièrement maintenu son tweet, alors même que X l’avait assorti d’une humiliante note de bas de page : « Les lecteurs ont ajouté… », qui mettait en lumière sa malhonnêteté.

  • Quels #impôts les #milliardaires paient-ils ?
    (publié juin 2023)

    A l’aide de données administratives inédites, reliant les déclarations de revenus des particuliers aux #déclarations_fiscales des entreprises en #France en 2016, les auteurs mesurent les #taux_d’imposition directe effectifs des ménages situés au sommet de la distribution des revenus. Cette nouvelle mesure, distincte du traditionnel revenu fiscal de référence en ce qu’elle intègre notamment les revenus non distribués des sociétés détenues par ces ménages, les amène à interroger la réalité de la progressivité de l’impôt.


    Enseignements clés

    - Le taux d’imposition effectif des ménages français apparaît en 2016 progressif jusqu’à des niveaux élevés de revenu. Il atteint 46 % pour les foyers appartenant aux 0,1 % les plus riches.
    - Le taux d’imposition effectif devient régressif au sommet de la distribution, passant de 46 % pour les 0,1 % les plus riches, à 26 % pour les 0,0002 % les plus riches.
    – Pour les « milliardaires », l’impôt sur le revenu ou l’ISF ne représentent qu’une fraction négligeable de leurs revenus globaux, alors que l’impôt sur les sociétés est le principal impôt acquitté.
    - Le taux plus faible d’imposition des plus hauts revenus s’explique par le fait que l’imposition des bénéfices des sociétés est plus faible que l’imposition des revenus personnels.

    https://www.ipp.eu/publication/16253

    #riches #fisc #fiscalité

    • The billionaire’s guide to doing taxes

      Do you want to pay less taxes? Great. Step one, be a rich person. Then, buy a yacht. Or a sports team. Give a lot to charity. Lose some money in the stock market. Above all, make sure most of your money exists in the form of assets, not cash — stocks, real estate, a Dutch master painting, fine jewelry, or whatever else strikes your fancy.

      They say that money is a universal language, but it speaks at different volumes. When you have a fathomless bounty of wealth, money doesn’t quite register as an expense until you add a lot of zeros to the end — so spending a lot to save a lot is a no brainer. It’s why the mega-rich often hire expensive tax lawyers, wealth managers, or even set up a whole office dedicated to tax strategy. “It’s not just preparing the return,” says Paul Wieseneck, a tax accountant and director of the Fuoco Group. “There’s so much more involved in planning, in accumulating, offsetting, and trying to mitigate the taxes as best as possible.”

      For the rich, taxes aren’t a springtime affair with a quick visit to H&R Block, but a year-round endeavor.

      How much tax a wealthy person owes in a given year is a complex tapestry threaded with exemptions, deductions, credits, and obscure loopholes you’ve never heard of. The ideal is to owe zilch. If that sounds impossible to achieve, just look at the leaked tax returns of the wealthiest Americans that nonprofit news site ProPublica analyzed in 2021: Over several years, billionaires Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Michael Bloomberg, among others, paid no federal income taxes at all.

      How do they do it? Here are some basic rules they live by.
      Don’t take a paycheck

      If your income is earned through wages paid to you by an employer, chances are your taxes are on the simpler side of the spectrum. Not as simple as it is for wage earners in other countries, where the government simply tells you how much you owe, but getting a paycheck from your boss means your taxes are automatically withheld each pay period. Filing your tax return might be as easy as filling out one form.

      You can pick and choose which deductions to take (like for student loan interest, or for having a home office), but the vast majority of households take the simpler standard deduction, which this year erases $14,600 from your tax bill. For tax year 2024, you’ll pay a 37 percent tax on any income you rake in over $609,350. That sounds like it would add up to a sizable amount for multimillionaires and billionaires — unless that income is just a minuscule share of their increasing wealth.

      Jeff Bezos, when he was still Amazon CEO, had a base salary of around $80,000 a year. Elon Musk doesn’t take a salary at all at Tesla. Apple CEO Tim Cook does get a $3 million salary, but it’s a small slice of the $63 million he received overall last year. Most wealthy entrepreneurs are paid in bountiful stock rewards; Musk is currently fighting to keep his record-breaking Tesla pay package, made up of a bunch of stock options and now valued at almost $56 billion. ProPublica found that, because their income fell below the threshold, at least 18 billionaires got a Covid-19 stimulus check.

      Paul Kiel, a ProPublica reporter who was an integral part of the newsroom’s billionaire tax return stories, says the income versus wealth divide was crucial in helping the public understand how differently the wealthy operate. “If you can avoid income as it’s defined in our system, and still get richer, that’s the best route,” he tells Vox.

      Stocks aren’t taxed until they’re sold — and even then, what’s taxed is the profit on the sale, called a capital gains tax. Billionaires (usually) don’t sell valuable stock. So how do they afford the daily expenses of life, whether it’s a new pleasure boat or a social media company? They borrow against their stock. This revolving door of credit allows them to buy what they want without incurring a capital gains tax. Though the “buy, borrow, die” strategy isn’t quite as sweet right now because interest rates are high, a Wall Street Journal piece from 2021 notes that those with $100 million or more could get interest rates as low as 0.87 percent at Merrill Lynch. The taxable value of a stock also resets when it’s passed on to an heir, so that if a wealthy scion chooses to sell their inherited stock, they’d only pay a tax on the increase in value since the original owner’s death.
      Plan on losing money

      If you do, regrettably, have to sell assets, fret not: just lose a lot of money, too, and pile on the offsets. “We do what’s called tax-loss harvesting,” says Wieseneck, using a simple example to illustrate. Say someone owns Pepsi stock, and it tanks. They sell at a loss, but then buy about the same amount of Coca Cola stock. The Pepsi loss can erase some (or even all, if you play your cards right) of the taxes owed on the gains made on Coca Cola stock.

      “During the year we try to accumulate losses,” says Wieseneck. “At the end of the year, if I know you have a capital gain on a sale of a property or a house or another investment, I’ll accumulate some losses for you that can offset [it].” Capital losses don’t also have to be applied in the same year — if you know you’ll be selling more assets next year, you can bank them for later.

      It’s illegal to quickly sell and then buy the same stock again — a practice called a “wash sale” — just to save on taxes, but the key word is “same.” Public companies often offer different classes of stock that essentially trade the same, and it’s not hard to trade similar-enough stocks back and forth. Exchange-traded funds (ETFs), for example, are like buckets containing a mix of stocks that can themselves be traded like a stock. A few different ETFs might perform roughly the same on the stock market; a person could sell one ETF and quickly buy another while avoiding the “do not sell and buy the same stock within 30 days” rule.
      Play tax rate arbitrage

      Another tool in the tax shrinking arsenal: leveraging the differences in tax rates, which vary based on the type of asset and how long someone owned it. Long-term gains — assets held for longer than a year — from the sale of stocks and bonds are taxed at rates as low as zero percent and as high as 25 percent. Short-term gains, meanwhile, can face a tax as high as 37 percent. Collectibles, which include art, antiques, cards, comic books, and more, have a max rate of 28 percent.

      The basic strategy here is to always get the lowest tax rate possible for your gains. A favorite tactic of billionaire investor Jeff Yass, according to reporting from ProPublica, is to place bets both for and against large companies, trying to amass a bunch of short-term losses on one end and long-term gains, which already enjoy a lower tax rate, on the other.

      Another kind of magic trick is to place high-tax income into lower-tax or no-tax wrappers, which can include things like tax-advantaged retirement accounts. One example is what’s called the private placement life insurance policy, a niche product that only the very wealthiest of the wealthy use. It can cost millions of dollars to set up, so it’s not worth it unless you’re rich, but the premiums a policyholder pays into the policy can be invested in high-growth investment options, such as hedge funds. The money you’d get back if you decide to cancel the policy isn’t taxed, but it’s not even necessary to take the money out. You can borrow money from the policy at low interest rates, and its benefits pass on tax-free to beneficiaries upon the original holder’s death. It’s insurance, says Michael Kosnitzky, co-chair of the law firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman’s Private Client & Family Office practice group, “but it also holds investment assets and, like any permanent insurance policy, the cash surrender value grows tax free.”

      A recent report from Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), the chair of the Senate Committee on Finance, laid out how big the scheme had gotten, currently sheltering at least $40 billion. The report found that the average net worth of people with such life insurance policies was over $100 million.
      Business or pleasure?

      When you’re very rich, it’s important to treat everything as a business expense. Private jets are expensive luxuries, but the cost can be fully tax deductible if the plane is mostly being used for business — and what counts as “mostly business” isn’t clear cut. Maybe you take a trip on your jet partly to take a business meeting, but also to spend a few relaxing days in a beautiful getaway spot. Private jet owners often set up LLCs and rent out their planes when they’re not personally using them to take advantage of the tax deduction, reported ProPublica.

      In fact, many expensive hobbies of the ultra-rich coincidentally turn into business expenses — yachts, racehorses, golf courses, and more. They’re often run very professionally, says Kiel, “but never quite seem to make a profit.”

      “Generally you’re not supposed to write stuff off that’s a hobby,” he continues. “But the wealthier you are, the more your hobbies appear to be businesses or are operated like businesses.”

      Despite the ubiquity of this practice, there’s risk to it, especially as the IRS ramps up audits of tax write-offs for private jets. If the wealthy are going to buy exorbitantly expensive yachts and claim it’s being used for a business, says Kosnitzky, “you’d better be on very solid ground.”
      Philanthropy pays

      Charity is a time-worn way the ultra-rich reduce their taxes — and it has the added bonus of putting a nice luster on their reputation. Many charitable organizations set up by billionaires are tax-exempt, and charitable donations are tax deductible. You can completely control when to make a donation, and of what size, depending on how much taxable income you have in a given year; it’s a nimble method of offsetting taxes.

      But the worthiness of charitable deductions can be questionable, because they’re “very, very loosely regulated,” says Kiel. The donations themselves can range from buying mosquito nets to prevent malaria to “paying for your kid’s private school.” Recall, for example, that former President Donald Trump once used money from his foundation to buy a painting of himself. Often, the wealthy can pour money into foundations and funds with philanthropic aims without actually distributing that money to anyone. One popular charitable medium today is called a donor-advised fund. Rich people put their money into these funds, and “advisers” who manage the account eventually give away the money — eventually being the key word. Even if the money hasn’t gone to a good cause yet, donors can take the tax deduction right away.

      In other cases, what raises eyebrows is whether an ostensibly charitable organization actually serves a public good. These charities get tax-exempt status because they’re supposed to have a “pro-social” purpose, says Daniel Reck, an economics professor at the University of Maryland who recently co-authored a paper analyzing tax evasion among the ultra-rich. Some billionaires claim their foundations qualify because they’re opening up a historical mansion or private art collection to the public. In fact, there are many examples of tax-exempt organizations not holding up their end of the bargain. As ProPublica reported, the historic landmark Carolands Chateau enjoys tax benefits but is open to the public just two hours per week. A private art gallery established by the late billionaire Sheldon Solow only recently became open to visitors, despite some of the art being held in a tax-exempt foundation.

      Also crucial to utilizing charity as a tax avoidance strategy is pumping up the value of your generosity. “You donate some fancy piece of fine art to a museum, you get an assessment for the art, it’s much more than you could actually ever sell it for,” explains Reck. “You get a big tax write-off.” It’s not just fine art, either — one popular form of overvaluation (until Congress passed a bill putting an end to it last year) involved inflating the value of land. Called a “syndicated conservation easement,” it took advantage of an incentive for environmental conservation, in which landowners who agree not to develop their land would get a tax break proportional to the fair market value of the land. “The game is that people just massively, ludicrously inflate these fair market values,” says Reck. In the syndicated version of this tax break, a group of investors buys land, gets an overvalued assessment on it, and shares the tax write-off between themselves. “Now there are a bunch of court cases about it,” Reck says.
      The gray area and the illegal stuff

      Some of the above tactics occupy an ambiguous, blurry zone of legality — it might be okay or not on a case-by-case basis. Some wealthy people may be alright with the risk, but Kosnitzky notes that it isn’t wise to play the “audit lottery” — there’s also reputational risk to consider. For those determined to take an “aggressive” tax position, a lot of documentation and even having their lawyer prepare a memo defending their tax strategy may be necessary. They might still end up paying a penalty and owing taxes, but exactly how much is up for negotiation.

      The paper Reck co-authored found that sophisticated tax evasion methods used by the very wealthy, including evasion through pass-through businesses or offshore accounts, often goes undetected by random audits. This suggests that current estimates of the “tax gap,” or the difference between taxes paid to the IRS and the amount it’s actually owed, is very likely an undercount.

      The difference between avoidance (legal) and evasion (illegal) is hard to untangle at times because wealthy people will dispute their audit, deploying brilliant tax lawyers to argue that the government is mistaken. These battles can take years to settle. It’s not just that the IRS needs a bigger budget to do all the audits it wants to — it did get extra funding in the Inflation Reduction Act — but that auditing a wealthy taxpayer is costlier, and much more time-consuming, than auditing a poor one. The structures of the well-off’s businesses are often extremely complex, too, which also makes auditing them more expensive.

      Reck noted that rich people dispute a greater share of the tax that the IRS says they should pay after an audit. In the middle of the income distribution, about 10 percent of the auditor’s recommended adjustment is disputed, says Reck. Among people with the highest income, however, the disputed share exceeds 50 percent. “That suggests that the taxpayer and their advisers, at least, believe that they’re either in some gray area or were allowed to do what they did.”

      “We’ve talked to a lot of former IRS agents, and they would often hear the line that for wealthy taxpayers, their tax return is like an opening offer,” says Kiel.

      How the very rich lose money, overvalue art, buy very expensive life insurance, and somehow profit.

      https://www.vox.com/money/2024/3/13/24086102/billionaires-wealthy-tax-avoidance-loopholes
      #philantropie

      via @freakonometrics