Foxconn's Buildings In Wisconsin Are Still Empty, One Year Later (theverge.com) 100
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Last April, The Verge reported that the Foxconn "innovation centers" scattered around Wisconsin were largely empty and that renovations were stalled. Several days after that article published, Foxconn held a press conference to announce that it had bought yet another building and told reporters that The Verge's reporting was incorrect. Specifically, Foxconn's Alan Yeung said The Verge's story had "a lot of inaccuracies, and we will actually make a correction, and we will make a statement about that." Yeung made those comments on April 12th, 2019. It is now April 12th, 2020, making it exactly one year since Foxconn promised a statement or correction regarding The Verge's report of empty buildings in Wisconsin. That statement or correction has never arrived. And the buildings are still empty.
TheThe main Foxconn project -- the factory in Mount Pleasant -- appears to be moving forward, albeit at a much smaller scale than the massive Generation 10.5 LCD fabrication plant originally promised and specified in the company's contract with the state. Earlier this month, the company submitted a project report to the state claiming it now employs more than 550 people, enough to qualify for lucrative subsidies. (Most were hired at the end of last year.) And although no LCD fabrication equipment has been reported as arriving at the factory, Foxconn has announced a giant glass dome that will house a data center, along with deals to make robotic coffee kiosks and alarm system components in what's been described as a "high-mix, low-to-medium volume" manufacturing strategy. And last week, Foxconn and Medtronic announced plans to build ventilators at the factory within four to six weeks. But it's unclear whether Foxconn will receive any subsidies. [...] The factory is set to open in May. Foxconn has deemed construction "essential," and work continues even under Wisconsin's stay-at-home order. It is unclear exactly what the factory will produce when it becomes operational.
TheThe main Foxconn project -- the factory in Mount Pleasant -- appears to be moving forward, albeit at a much smaller scale than the massive Generation 10.5 LCD fabrication plant originally promised and specified in the company's contract with the state. Earlier this month, the company submitted a project report to the state claiming it now employs more than 550 people, enough to qualify for lucrative subsidies. (Most were hired at the end of last year.) And although no LCD fabrication equipment has been reported as arriving at the factory, Foxconn has announced a giant glass dome that will house a data center, along with deals to make robotic coffee kiosks and alarm system components in what's been described as a "high-mix, low-to-medium volume" manufacturing strategy. And last week, Foxconn and Medtronic announced plans to build ventilators at the factory within four to six weeks. But it's unclear whether Foxconn will receive any subsidies. [...] The factory is set to open in May. Foxconn has deemed construction "essential," and work continues even under Wisconsin's stay-at-home order. It is unclear exactly what the factory will produce when it becomes operational.
"Foxconn announced ..." (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's the way the company who installed suicide nets for their factories plays
What would you have done differently if you had been in charge at Foxconn?
Re:"Foxconn announced ..." (Score:5, Insightful)
What would you have done differently if you had been in charge at Foxconn?
Nothing. That's just the way CxO's think.
Now if I were in charge of the state's side of the thing, I probably wouldn't have gone through with the deal in the first place, knowing what lousy partners Foxconn are. But then what Republican administration actually looks at anything other than what the government can give to the private half of their public-private partnerships?
Re: (Score:3)
It's not that, it was a really good deal for Foxconn. I don't mean the subsidies, I mean immunising themselves against any trade sanctions. Look at what's happened to Huawei, who didn't go through the theatrics, vs. Foxconn, who did. Even if they never get a cent in subsidies, you know they'll never have to face any of the crap that Huawei have been put through in the last couple of years. So strategically it was a brilliant move.
Oh, and for the person who brought up the suicide red herring: Foxconn pl
Increased pay, lowered worker hours (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"Foxconn announced ..." (Score:4, Informative)
One reason many of the factories left is because Americans grew intolerant of being unable to breathe the air and drink the water. Eliminating taxes that support infrastructure like roads, bridges, airports, and even education, won't bring manufacturing back. If the goods the new factories make can't be transported to their markets, it doesn't do much good to build factories. If people don't get educated, there won't be anyone qualified to work in the factories at anything but sweeping the floors.
You have all the GOP talking points memorized well. Now you just need to start thinking about them.
Re: (Score:1)
There's more than 1 way to tax. The consumption tax replacement would more than replace the income taxes, as they would wildly grow the economy so there is more money in the country to tax, broaden the tax base so that many more people were paying (there's only about 160 million paychecks right now to tax with an income tax), and everyone's individual tax burden would be less except for the rich, who won't much really care, they're rich, after all, and like everyone else, they don't HAVE to pay the consump
Re: (Score:2)
There's more than 1 way to tax. The consumption tax replacement would more than replace the income taxes, as they would wildly grow the economy
Except that no country has ever effectively done that, so pie in the sky assumptions about "wild growth" seem to be forever in the future, while the elimination of income tax seems also, forever be somewhere in the future "when everything has been paid for" and we all know that event will never occur for a government with it's insatiable appetite to take from us in taxes in order to "give" us benefits. Cf: Covid-19 and the $2.5Billion relief act paid for with _future_ money in treasury debt.
VAT seems to be
Re: (Score:1)
"Except that no country has ever effectively done that, "
You mean, no _other_ country, since we obviously _did_ do that before 1913, with record-setting economic expansion.
"VAT seems to be an easy way to generate revenue"
No, we shouldn't do that, because it gives politicians too much input into what companies do well and what companies don't, so massive corruption ensues, just like now with campaign finance funding favoring the rich. VATs are bad. A simple, over-the-counter sales tax with the anti-regress
Re: (Score:2)
Companies don't pay a federal income tax. They pay lots of other taxes including taxes on net profits. But no federal income tax, that's just for human people not corporate people.
Re: (Score:1)
Really, you haven't heard of corporate income taxes? That's what Trump lowered from 35% to 21%. They also incur costs of paying 7.65% of their employee's earnings in the "employer's share" of payroll taxes. Both payroll taxes and employee's individual income taxes increase labor costs to employers. Capital gains taxes make investment capital less lucrative for investors. Estate taxes may destroy the business of an owner that dies.
Income taxes of all flavors damage US business which diminishes job a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That hair is split.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. The corporate equivalent to income would be gross revenue. There is no federal tax on gross revenue, only on net profits. It would be like the government taxing only the part of your income that you don't use to buy groceries, pay rent or go to the movies.
Re: (Score:1)
However you want to term it, the Feds tax the companies that must raise prices in order to get the money to send to Washington, which results in their necessity to raise prices of their products, or lower employee wages, or lower investor dividends in order to cough up that tax money, and all those things give advantage to the competition, especially the foreign competition with super-low worker wages and lower corporate income taxes in their home countries, at least before Trump lowered ours from 35% to 21
Re: (Score:1)
Your person income tax is also a tax on profit. That is why you can deduct business expenses. If you made all your money personally reselling baseball cards an say in a year you bought $40k of cards then sold $70k of cards. your taxes would be on the $30k profit which you would report as $70k gross income less the $40k deductions. Which is fundamentally the same way we all do our taxes. Now the tax rates and incentives make it all unique. NOw if you incorporate your business and pay yourself a salary out of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some kind of batshit Libertarian anyway. The real world means nothing to those guys.
Re: (Score:1)
So what's the love for the citizen-enslavement by the 2nd-listed feature of the communist manifesto, graduated income taxes? They suppress prosperity.
Re: (Score:2)
They suppress prosperity.
And this is why Somalia is so much richer per capita than the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Reality is just too much for you Libertarian idiots isn't it?
Re: (Score:1)
The reality is that the globalist elites are enriching themselves and enslaving the middle class by shipping jobs out of the USA and they're using the income taxes to do it. I've been for the FairTax for 15 years but it has only been about the last 2 years that I've figured out the things about the globalist elites. They must be stopped or the American middle class is on the road to serfdom.
Re: (Score:1)
Oman, Bermuda, Kuwait, etc. do not have 300+ million citizens ready to go to work in factories, would-class transportation systems, world-beating low energy rates, natural resources up the wazoo, etc. The USA would be uniquely positioned to beat up the entire world's economies with the advantages of prosperity-promoting abolishing of income taxes in favor of extremely simple sales taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
300+ million citizens ready to go to work in factories
Have you tried hiring for manufacturing? I have. We have that many citizens, but they are certainly not ready to go to work in factories. Our society still stigmatizes factory work, kids graduate believing it's dirty work and that they should all be office workers. This is a real problem, you can't expect an industry to grow when people don't want the jobs that are already available.
would-class transportation systems
Paid for or subsidized by our taxes
world-beating low energy rates
Paid for or subsidized by our taxes
abolishing of income taxes in favor of extremely simple sales taxes
I'll be honest, I don't understand the net gain if the g
Re: (Score:1)
"Have you tried hiring for manufacturing? I have. We have that many citizens, but they are certainly not ready to go to work in factories. Our society still stigmatizes factory work, kids graduate believing it's dirty work and that they should all be office workers. This is a real problem, you can't expect an industry to grow when people don't want the jobs that are already available."
There is nothing new here. I graduated in 1965 in a factory town in Ohio. Those of us that were even semi-comfortable wit
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing new here. I graduated in 1965 in a factory town in Ohio. Those of us that were even semi-comfortable with STEM studies knew we didn't want to endure factories.
So your previous statement about there being 300 million ready to work in factories wasn't just you being wrong, it was a lie?
Well, I see the problem. $25 / hr isn't very damned much
So you say factories need to pay more in order to encourage Americans to work there, while they have not had to do so in other countries. Chinese manufacturing salaries average just over $10k annually and manufacturers are moving to countries with even cheaper labor than that, is the lack of income tax going to make it worth paying more than 5x for wages? Seems wild, show me some num
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not going into that point by point, because I can't believe you are possibly that unenlightened about things like how wages are set, how prices are set, wages in other countries vs wages in the USA, etc. I believe you are just entertaining yourself with argument, while I have a pile of unauthorized (by me) weeds, small trees, and so forth out back waiting to be removed by me and my Sawzall. Argue with someone else, I believe I stated it well enough for an average person to understand how it works.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I just can't spare the time to attempt to explain things to someone so monumentally ignorant to say that other countries haven't had to raise wages to get factory workers as we must do, completely ignoring the costs of living and the serf-like living conditions in low-wage countries. That's either maximally clueless or you are arguing just for sport and will say anything to get a response and entertain yourself. Sorry, I'm not playing any more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The US doesn't have 300+ million citizens ready to go to work in factories either (not everyone wants to work in a factory).
The US doesn't have "would-class [sic] transportation systems" either [ https://www.travelandleisure.c... [travelandleisure.com] ].
Nor does the US have " world-beating low energy rates" [ https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com] ]
Re: (Score:2)
The US doesn't have 300+ million citizens ready to go to work in factories either
Of course it does! It's just that the three year olds and 99 year olds are lazy. If they weren't being taxed they'd have limitless prosperity through working at low wages in factories!
Re: (Score:1)
"The US doesn't have 300+ million citizens ready to go to work in factories either (not everyone wants to work in a factory)."
Yeah, an exaggeration, but 300 million would be paying taxes even if they didn't earn the money.
"The US doesn't have "would-class [sic] transportation systems" either"
This references freight rail and the interstate highway system for moving truck cargo. We are unparalleled.
"Nor does the US have " world-beating low energy rates"
12.5 cents per KwH here is damned cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
12.5 cents per KwH may be "damned cheap" but that doesn't mean that it is a "world-beating low energy rate". If you followed the link you will see that there are 8 countries with lower electricity rates (i.e. the US doesn't have world-beating low energy rates).
If you go by just the shear mileage of rail then I guess you can say that the US has world-class transportation but I would interpret "world-class transportation" as a quality not quantity issue.
Re: (Score:2)
You really think that it is just the federal income tax that is holding companies back from manufacturing in the US? You don't think the fact that they can pay workers substantially less in other countries isn't also a factor? You don't think that maybe the lax environmental protections in other countries might also be a factor?
You would have to make a lot more changes to the US way of life than eliminating federal income tax before the " USA would be the hands-down cheapest place on the planet to manufactu
Re: (Score:1)
Its the combination of US pay scales and US income taxes. We can't do anything about the pay scales, and shouldn't, but we could easily zero out the income taxes.
Natural gas, of which we have oceans and the rest of the world mostly doesn't, will keep our emmissions user friendly, and now even cheaper than coal.
I don't think it would require more than nuking the income taxes. We are already way ahead of anywhere else in the world in a lot of things that cost them up the wazoo, but we have cheaply. Land
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"Foxconn announced ..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Which, prior to installation, the factories had a lower suicide rate than China itself, the surrounding area, neighbouring countries or even the USA.
Suicides are bad, sot hey put up netting to bring them down even more. They're actually putting up the same kinds of nets on bridges around North America too because well, suicide.
Re: (Score:2)
because well, suicide
We're talking about suicide nets for slaves with no other way to escape, you dumb fucking shill.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the way the company who installed suicide nets for their factories plays.
They were just the middleman; clearly it's Apple that deserves the credit for saving those lives. ;)
That's not technically true... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: Well I hope so (Score:2)
You're new here huh? I mean, yeah pandemic and all but you act as if that is what should be focused on here, which is silly. Stop being silly, you look like an idiot.
Re:Pretty short-sighted headline (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, there is a push to move manufacturing out of China. To other countries in SE Asia (Vietnam in particular), Mexico and anywhere else they can find cheap labor. None of it will come to the US.
Even if it does come to the US (Score:2)
Go to YouTube and look up videos on how the Steam controller was made. It's nuts.
Re: (Score:2)
Factory automation is at the point where nearly anything in manufacturing can be automated.
Factory automation is not a magic wand that somehow eliminates human labor in the blink of an eye, unskilled labor possibly but even that is not as gone as you suggest. Yes you can automate production lines like the steam controller, BUT that's not general automation easily applicable to any product. Think about toilet-paper, think about milk-cartons and extruded plastics, think about light-bulbs (LED or otherwise), all of these are nearly fully automated systems (watch those YouTube shorts about how-stuff-
Re: (Score:1)
"there'll be few jobs. Factory automation is at the point where nearly anything in manufacturing can be automated. The reason it's not in China is they pay slave labor wages."
US auto plants are highly automated, yet 1000's of workers tromp in and out of them every day, building cars and trucks at internationally competitive prices. Foreign companies in some cases have even opened factories here and build cars at competitive prices with high levels of automation.
You're never going to completely replace wor
Re: (Score:2)
Yes the number of bodies needed in the factory on a day to day basis falls, and it's a trend observable everywhere, even in countries with absurdly low costs of labor. The point is that it is possible to build that lights-out factory anywhere but you need mostly skilled labor up front and a mix of skilled an unskilled labor forever if a factory is running, its never zero. But it is possible to hit zero employment in unskilled labor if you never build another factory and that is not a GoodThing(tm)!
Lookup GE
That's one part, but not all. (Score:2)
I agree a lot of the manufacturing will move to other Asian countries - but not all.
Manufacturing is at the point where if you have to move it at all, some of it can be done anywhere for nearly the same price due to automation - so why not the U.S.? It also then serves to avoid tariffs.
Especially when Foxconn has a space and expertise to ramp up manufacturing quaky...
It was true at one point that the end-all was simply cheap labor, but the price of labor is a smaller and smaller factor every year, compared
South Sudan (Score:2)
South Sudan
Re: (Score:3)
Regardless of what happened with that building and Foxconn in the past, that article is ignoring a massive truth about going forward.
After this point there is going to be a massive push to move manufacturing out of China. Japan is paying ALL of its companies to move manufacturing out of China, and something similar will happen for U.S. companies...
So going forward that factory is going be a massive boon for Foxconn and Wisconsin as it provides a very quick way to move some production immediately back to the United States.
This is a half-truth. The type of manufacturing that Japan is moving out of China is of the high-value-added type, not necessarily the type of cheap low-value-added that the US lost to China two decades ago.
There's absolutely no sense in bringing back that type of manufacturing back to the US, you know, the one assembling barbie dolls or surgical masks. We don't have that much high-value-added manufacturing being done in China to begin with. And a lot of this low-value-added production is already being mo
It's quite clear what the factory will produce (Score:3)
The factory will produce tax benefits, subsidies, and political goodwill. That's pure profit, and it does not require any of that difficult and dirty "labor"
Re: (Score:3)
So what is going to stop the rich from buying their next yacht in Belize or Vanuatu and avoiding the luxury tax? That's already how many corporate executives are avoiding US income taxes, taking the majority of their pay from their company's subsidiary in Bermuda or Panama.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't quite work that way but keep believing that. Most CEO's continue to pay income taxes. If you want to consume money, you need to pay income taxes on it first. So you can have billions in the bank in Belize but as soon as you need to go shop for groceries, you need to pay income taxes on that. What people are trying to avoid by parking their money in Belize is investment and estate taxes. So you can invest money in Belize and their government won't charge you for the privilege, if you die, you can
Re: (Score:1)
" Most CEO's continue to pay income taxes. If you want to consume money, you need to pay income taxes on it first."
Not if you repeal the 16th Amendment that authorizes income taxation. The FairTax bill, HR 25, calls for that.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to consume money, you need to pay income taxes on it first.
Wrong. My sister-in-law is living in Houston right now, taking money from her Peruvian teacher's pension from the ATM down the street. Nothing stops her from doing a simple bank transfer from her bank in Peru to CitiCorp or Main Street Bank either, and living off that instead. If she were to buy a car with a check from that US bank it would be the first time she would pay taxes in the US on it, and that would just be state sales tax. We intend to do essentially the same thing in reverse when we retire i
Re:Wanna Fix That? (Score:4, Interesting)
If you want to consume money, you need to pay income taxes on it first.
Ha, they've got you fooled. They don't "buy" things, they get an interest-only loan with their wealth as collateral and then just pay interest, which is both much smaller and sometimes tax deductible. There are a bunch of other tricks too.
And most CEO compensation comes in the form of stock options, which isn't classified as "income" at all in a discussion of taxes, since there are ways to get it taxed as capital gains. Or you can just borrow against it as mentioned above. Do you really think the stuff you say? Because you have completely misunderstood how wealth works for wealthy people.
Re: (Score:2)
you have completely misunderstood how wealth works for wealthy people.
That's why they're proposing this, they really don't understand how finances work above minimum wage.
Re: (Score:1)
This is all exactly why income taxation sucks - its so easy to avoid. Thanks for proving my point.
Now, when someone takes their stock options and buys a yacht, Ferrari, big-screen TV, mansion overlooking Beverly Hills (if it's new-built - existing houses are "used" and therefore tax-free), those are the points at which they pay tax on the purchases of their new items bought at retail. It is far more certain than the sieve that is described above for people avoiding income taxes with loans and such.
Re: (Score:3)
Off-shore tax havens are so 1990s. For the last 20 years the rich have been avoiding taxes by setting up "dynasty trusts" in South Dakota and a few other states with similarly structured secretive financial products. Why on earth would anyone park their money is some banana republic where the dictator is liable to nationalize the assets in the banks when you can keep your money in dollars, parked safely in the US, where we still sort of have rule of law (unless Trump gets reelected, then all bets are off).
Re: (Score:1)
With a consumption tax, there's no need to hide income. The gov't isn't interested in one's income. They are only interested when people buy a new item for sale at retail or a service. There is no requirement to buy anything, so it is possible to not pay any federal taxes at all if you don't spend above the poverty level - spending at or below the poverty level is not taxed.
Re: (Score:1)
"So what is going to stop the rich from buying their next yacht in Belize or Vanuatu and avoiding the luxury tax? "
US Customs, and Leavenworth.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you suppose the Bush family's jet is registered in Honduras? So they don't pay taxes on its value or its use, and when they sell it they won't have to pay US taxes on it. Much as the entire herd of them deserves to be in Leavenworth they're not going there any time soon.
Re: (Score:1)
Doesn't matter where it's registered. They're US citizens and they purchased a new item for sale at retail, so they owe the tax. Buying it overseas doesn't absolve them, and registering it somewhere else doesn't either.
You're fishing around for some kind of envy-material, something to point a finger at someone else "getting away" with something. But for shear revenue collection, this would haul in way more than income tax when dealing with habitual tax cheats. Its harder to avoid a consumption tax tha
Re:Wanna Fix That? (Score:5, Informative)
They're US citizens and they purchased a new item for sale at retail, so they owe the tax.
Nope. We own four lots and a house in Peru, we have paid exactly $0 US tax on all of that. If I buy a boat in Peru and sail it to Seattle and don't change the registration to the US then I still won't have paid any tax on it. If I create a Panamanian shell company and lease that boat to Bill Gates then I still am not paying any US tax on it and I can have that company pay me a salary in Panama and still won't owe any US tax. If Bill likes it and decides to buy the boat the money goes to the Panamanian company and the US gets none of it in tax receipts. Why do you think Mossack Fonseca registered over 200,000 shell companies (and they're only one of scores of sleazebag law firms doing the same thing)?
If you make $50,000/year and try to hide part of your income from the IRS you'll have trouble. If you make $50,000,000/year there are entire industries who will ensure that you pay almost nothing in taxes.
Re: (Score:1)
"Nope. We own four lots and a house in Peru, we have paid exactly $0 US tax on all of that."
Of course. The FairTax hasn't been passed yet. If it is, your property will be grandfathered. If you buy more, you will owe on the purchase price.
Re: (Score:2)
And really think that's going to work? If I buy the lot adjoining the one we have in Puno (which actually has a slightly nicer view and a house on it) do you really think that people are going to tell the US gov't "Hey, I just payed $45,000 for this lot. Charge me for the taxes now!" If so you really have never spoken to anyone legitimately rich.
More likely you'd never see a rich person ever purchase anything of value ever again. They'd lease the yacht, their shell company in Bermuda would be the owner
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing is perfect. I suspect you could purchase things overseas that are never brought back to the USA without paying tax on it and get away with it. But.. how much $ will be lost to the US gov't this way. Pennies. Not worth worrying about when compared to the income tax cheats.
Re: (Score:2)
So on $10 trillion on consumer spending, much of which is not going to qualify for your luxury tax, you're going to raise in excess of $3.5 trillion? And you think that people are gong to actually support that idea? And here I thought Libertardians were ridiculous.
Re: (Score:1)
How could anyone NOT support a tax that you are not required to pay?
$10 T? Does that include the president's Boeing 757 that, if bought at retail for $100M, would send $23M directly to the treasury? He actually bought it used from an airline, but "used" things from commercial users that never paid the FairTax on it because it was business use still has to be paid, so if he got it half-price, at $50M, then $11.5M to US treasury. Big ticket items from the rich are going to go a long way... I wonder wher
Re: (Score:3)
Ten trillion is what US consumers spent last year, everything from toilet paper to mega-yachts. Three and a half trillion was the US government's tax revenue in 2018. Even if you apply your 23% "Fair Tax" to everything instead of just luxuries you still come up a trillion dollars short of current revenues.
Re: (Score:1)
Luxuries are everything over the poverty level. New Galaxy Note 10+? $1.1K. Used Galaxy Note 10+ 8 months after it came out? $600. New one is a luxury, used one is not, and not taxed since used things are not taxed under the FairTax.
As for $10T, that is before US citizens once again become prosperous by the rising wage and salary scale that comes with a labor shortage that comes with the building of 10's of 1000's of new factories to take advantage of income-taxless manufacturing. When people have
Re: (Score:2)
"original researchers"
David Stockman? This is just repackaged Supply Side Economics, we've forced it on numerous countries around the world and it's never worked. Ever.
Re: (Score:1)
This worked 1865 - 1900, most rapid economic growth in our history. Consumption taxes. Its just that the rich don't like 'em, so's they got the 16th Amendment to get the middle class paying more of the load. Worked. Gov't comes steals your money now. Gotta love that, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Is ignorance of history a requirement for membership in your movement, like it seems to be for the Libertarians? I have no words that are adequate for this.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
"If you make $50,000/year and try to hide part of your income from the IRS you'll have trouble. If you make $50,000,000/year there are entire industries who will ensure that you pay almost nothing in taxes."
And that is exactly why we should abolish income taxes. In addition to all the other drawbacks, they don't work for crap. They miss Billions of dollars of owed tax due to slick tax lawyers and accountants. Consumption taxes are much harder to avoid.
Re: (Score:2)
Consumption taxes are trivially easy to avoid, just never "buy" the thing in your own name. Jay Leno could found an antique automobile museum and have it buy a 1928 Duesenberg Model J for him to drive around town and not pay any taxes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
An antique automobile is a used automobile and therefore not subject to tax anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't matter where it's registered. They're US citizens and they purchased a new item for sale at retail, so they owe the tax. Buying it overseas doesn't absolve them, and registering it somewhere else doesn't either.
To echo the poster below, "Nope."
We own property in Cambodia and we paid/pay no tax on it anywhere- not here, not there, not anywhere. We paid no taxes on it when we purchased it and we won't pay taxes anywhere if we sell it.
We don't owe the US a penny for anything connected to it, period. We paid the payroll taxes when we earned the money to buy it, but that's it.
To recap, "Nope."
Re: (Score:1)
FairTax isn't law yet.
Re: (Score:2)
FairTax isn't law yet.
Neither is the tax exemption for breeding unicorns, so what?
In other words, you're wrong. Try to be graceful about it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see how they manage the loopholes associated with "used" items. Surely there will be some gimmick of claiming near-new items as used and this will be extremely hard to stop.
The site's FAQ on this is long on enforcement promises, but short on how they would nip "used" and other schemes in the bud without basically Federalizing every possible transaction.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean for items like cars you're obviously going to have compliance, but I can see a whole constellation of shady manufacturing where items are sold nearly complete as "unfinished goods" into a dubious supply chain market where all you have to do is add some minor, non-included component or labor to turn it into a finished good.
The idea that the tax collection system is suddenly going to have the bandwidth and the tenacity to manage this isn't really believable, especially at the high end where the real ta
Re: (Score:1)
"I mean for items like cars you're obviously going to have compliance, but I can see a whole constellation of shady manufacturing where items are sold nearly complete as "unfinished goods" into a dubious supply chain market where all you have to do is add some minor, non-included component or labor to turn it into a finished good."
The gov't is not going to care about whether what was sold to you is a working widget or a part like a lawn mower blade, useless without the rest of the machine. If it goes over
Re: (Score:1)
This idea happened way before MAGA, about 20 years ago by a group of businessmen attempting to make American great again. MAGA is not a new concept. Read the book:
https://www.amazon.com/FairTax... [amazon.com]
Scooter's outta here! (Score:1)
1 year +1 day! (Score:3)
Yeung made those comments on April 12th, 2019. It is now April 12th, 2020, making it exactly one year since Foxconn promised a statement
Given that 2020 is a leap year, they actually got a whole extra day as well.
Foxconn is still massively in the hole (Score:2)
What Foxconn has is a massive amount of concrete poured, 550 people on their payroll doing fuck all and some tax credits shielding them from the full cost ... but it still cost them a ton of money.
What Foxconn is doing for the moment is keeping their options open and the contract alive, this is not making them money.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be surprised if most of those 550 people weren't construction workers.
GOP did a great job (Score:2)
Impressive.
Same situation in Guiyang, China (Score:1)