- This topic has 1 reply, 9 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well I think we can all safely assume that this “Plan contra capital golondrina” will inadvertently make sending money to buy Costa Rica real estate even more complicated than it already is…
[url=http://www.nacion.com/2013-01-22/ElPais/Plan-contra-capital–golondrina–dio-bienvenida-a-los-diputados.aspx]Plan contra capital ‘golondrina’ dio bienvenida a los diputados[/url]
“La preocupación del Ejecutivo es que continúe la llegada de grandes capitales externos que aprovechan las tasas de interés altas que se están pagando en el país. Esos dineros crean trastornos en la economía interna y puede provocar el incremento de los precios para la población y dificultades para los productores. Quizá a eso se refería la presidenta Laura Chinchilla cuando comparó esos capitales con “armas de destrucción masiva”, aunque ayer Ayales ni siquiera se atrevió a usar el adjetivo “especulativos” pues reconoció que son parte de la dinámica financiera internacional.”
“El Banco Central quedaría facultado para pedir al Ejecutivo que aplique un aumento en el impuesto de la renta, de hasta 30 puntos por encima de los gravámenes vigentes….El Central también podría definir un depósito obligatorio de hasta el 25% sobre esas inversiones, con lo cual bajaría su rentabilidad.”
José María Villalta, de Frente Amplio, dijo que ve “con buenos ojos” el plan, y el PUSC también manifestó anuencia a apoyarlo. El Gobierno quiere que se apruebe en un mes, pero en el Congreso nadie se atreve a calcular plazos.
Isn’t it interesting that Costa Rica is suggesting a 30% tax which just happens to be the exact same withholding that has been implemented by the U.S with FATCA?
From the [url=http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_US/us/Services/tax/930c9948e681a210VgnVCM100000ba42f00aRCRD.htm]Deloitte site[/url]:
“Under newly proposed U.S. Treasury Code Sections 1471 through 1474, effective for payments after December 31, 2012, all foreign financial institutions (FFIs) will be required to enter into disclosure compliance agreements with the U.S. Treasury, and all non-financial foreign entities (NFFEs) must report and/or certify their ownership or be subject to the same 30 percent withholding.”
As reported in the [url=http://www.internationalman.com/global-perspectives/weekly-update-the-grip-gets-tighter-irs-finalizes-fatca]InternationalMan:[/url]
“Last week the IRS finalized the widely unpopular FATCA regulations, a monstrosity of 544 pages.
These costly regulations make the world a smaller place for Americans. Most foreign banks want nothing to do with American clients and it is no wonder why. The benefits do not outweigh the costs; any rational business owner would make the same decision…. Perhaps it is a desired effect.
Edicts like FATCA serve as an indirect form of capital controls, as they effectively create significant barriers for capital to leave the US.
We shouldn’t be surprised that broke governments everywhere are finding all sorts of dastardly creative ways to squeeze their citizens more and more.”
What do you think?
Scott
Scott
I was just going to ask you about this…hmmmm.. are they doing this to protect or at least try and protect costa rica against the influx of dollars????
is this a good thing or a bad thing??? obviously this will hurt some aspect in some verticals but will this help at all from your point of view???
sadly costa rica is like a child and the U.S. is its overweight drunken irresponsible father.
I see no coincidence arriving at this magic 30% number just like I see none with new gun laws that dona laura wants to implement
like all legal gun owners needing to spend even more money on a separate policy
ok
in the next 5 to 10 years some of us may be migrating again :D:D:D:D:D:D:D
I am liking
Ecuador and chile
by the way.. all these laws are targeted towards large sums of money
in my opinion one of the best hedges is to start generating a monthly cashflow
using the internet
like publishing books on amazons kindle
or setting up Adsense like our buddy scott oliver
I would bet he generates at least $1000 per month from this site in adsense income
look at insidecostarica.com enrico something some itlian guy who I have met and I don’t like him.:D:D
but he is smart guy
he started inside costa rica and sold it and started another site
http://qcostarica.com/edition/he makes all of his money in adversting
or create info products and sell them
there are a whole lot of ways to generate cashflow
and this is something governments will never be able to take away because
your an entrepreneur 🙂
WOW, these socialist all drink the same cool-aide, no surprise though. It works real well here in the states. You tax it more and you get less of it. Less innovations, less job growth and less taxes that come from all the activities associated with venture investment capital. More likely Pres.BHO placed a call to gease the palm’s of some of CR’s elite politicians to come up with this to further stem the out flow of monies fleeing the states.
Just when I realized Costa Rica was a place that a person could enjoy life. Now the socialist start to ruin this country also. Shame on them! My money will never see Costa Rica and all the good it would have done. Costa Rica will be sorry in then long term if they follow through with these idiotic ideas. The US was great because of investment and now just a shell. It would be Costa Rica’s turn to shine but not with punishing the creators of wealth. Very sad.
Costa Rica entered upon a socialist path in the aftermath of the civil war and the subsequent new constitution in 1948. As compared to its Central American neighbors, it has actually done very well economically and socially. If wealth has been destroyed in the intervening sixty-five years, the society certainly has not.
Socialism has served Costa Rica well and I personally would never want to inject my values on it. However we are entering a completely new world with what I foresee as very problematic. The US is in trouble because of its own arrogance. Costa Rica might want to think twice before following the US. Also Costa Rica has been fortunate that foreign capital has flowed into it. That does not mean it always will be the case.
You’re certainly correct that Costa Rica cannot rely forever on the inflow of foreign capital. On the other hand, at the risk of becoming a client state, it does appear that China (an up and coming player on the world stage) is very interested in shoring up this little corner of the world.
Of course, nothin’s free. The Chinese, like the Americans, are looking for something in return. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. As Americans, with our genetic skepticism of anything communist, we are wary of the Chinese, but who knows? They may turn out to be the good guys after all.
In the meantime, safe investment returns here vastly exceed anything you could hope for in the U.S. and cash will continue to flow in to take advantage of them. Marcia and I are in that process even as I write this. Others, wiser than us, will, too.
David, why not ask the Tibetans about the good guys!! You are right there is no free lunch but what is the cost?
[quote=”DavidCMurray”]You’re certainly correct that Costa Rica cannot rely forever on the inflow of foreign capital. On the other hand, at the risk of becoming a client state, it does appear that China (an up and coming player on the world stage) is very interested in shoring up this little corner of the world.
Of course, nothin’s free. The Chinese, like the Americans, are looking for something in return. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. As Americans, with our genetic skepticism of anything communist, we are wary of the Chinese, but who knows? They may turn out to be the good guys after all.
In the meantime, safe investment returns here vastly exceed anything you could hope for in the U.S. and cash will continue to flow in to take advantage of them. Marcia and I are in that process even as I write this. Others, wiser than us, will, too.
[/quote][quote=”orcas0606″]David, why not ask the Tibetans about the good guys!! You are right there is no free lunch but what is the cost?[/quote]
You are absolutely correct that the Chinese record [i]vis a vis[/i] the Tibetans is awful on a level matched only, perhaps, by the Europeans’ record [i]vis a vis[/i] the native populations of the Western Hemisphere. It’s our attitudes toward such behavior that have evolved but not the behavior itself. But if we are to consider the two countries’ records, we should use the same yardstick.
I’m not arguing that the American record is all bad and that the Chinese record is all good. All I’m saying is that we Americans have been brought up to see the Chinese through an attitudinal filter that may not render an entirely objective view.
[quote=”DavidCMurray”]You’re certainly correct that Costa Rica cannot rely forever on the inflow of foreign capital. On the other hand, at the risk of becoming a client state, it does appear that China (an up and coming player on the world stage) is very interested in shoring up this little corner of the world.
Of course, nothin’s free. The Chinese, like the Americans, are looking for something in return. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. As Americans, with our genetic skepticism of anything communist, we are wary of the Chinese, but who knows? They may turn out to be the good guys after all. [/quote]
Nah! Don’t worry about China David!
In a brilliant “diplomatic” move…. “The right to a preemptive nuclear strike against China is now part of US law – thanks to the National Defense Authorization Act…
The Pentagon’s also ordered a thorough review of when, and how, America could strike at the network of tunnels believed to hold Beijing’s atomic arsenals.”
After that kind of a “nuclear strike” who cares about “rights?” The whole planet would be unliveable…
And haven’t you always wondered about the concept of a “preemptive” strike?
Surely if the U./S. has the “right” to a “preemptive” strike against China then China surely has the “right” to a “pre-preemptive” strike against the U.S., no?
[quote=”Scott”][quote=”DavidCMurray”]You’re certainly correct that Costa Rica cannot rely forever on the inflow of foreign capital. On the other hand, at the risk of becoming a client state, it does appear that China (an up and coming player on the world stage) is very interested in shoring up this little corner of the world.
Of course, nothin’s free. The Chinese, like the Americans, are looking for something in return. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. As Americans, with our genetic skepticism of anything communist, we are wary of the Chinese, but who knows? They may turn out to be the good guys after all. [/quote]
Nah! Don’t worry about China David!
In a brilliant “diplomatic” move…. “The right to a preemptive nuclear strike against China is now part of US law – thanks to the National Defense Authorization Act…
The Pentagon’s also ordered a thorough review of when, and how, America could strike at the network of tunnels believed to hold Beijing’s atomic arsenals.”
After that kind of a “nuclear strike” who cares about “rights?” The whole planet would be unliveable…
And haven’t you always wondered about the concept of a “preemptive” strike?
Surely if the U./S. has the “right” to a “preemptive” strike against China then China surely has the “right” to a “pre-preemptive” strike against the U.S., no?
[/quote]Scott
[b]No.[/b][size=200][/size]
why??
because the U.S is the force for good 😀
because the U.S. has the inalienable right to do whatever it wants. that’s the American way 8)8)8)
because the U.S. is indeed the U.S. the most free democratic developed society in the world. :?:?:?:?
how dare you insinuate that China.. Iran or any other country has the right to defend itself. :?:?
shame on you for bringing this up. :?:?:?
[quote=”DavidCMurray”][quote=”orcas0606″]David, why not ask the Tibetans about the good guys!! You are right there is no free lunch but what is the cost?[/quote]
You are absolutely correct that the Chinese record [i]vis a vis[/i] the Tibetans is awful on a level matched only, perhaps, by the Europeans’ record [i]vis a vis[/i] the native populations of the Western Hemisphere. It’s our attitudes toward such behavior that have evolved but not the behavior itself. But if we are to consider the two countries’ records, we should use the same yardstick.
I’m not arguing that the American record is all bad and that the Chinese record is all good. All I’m saying is that we Americans have been brought up to see the Chinese through an attitudinal filter that may not render an entirely objective view.
[/quote]David, not sure how to take on your statement, almost sounds like you are a defender and advocate of China? I am not the brightest bulb on the tree, but I do know this….the Chinese do not allow you to speak freely, own firearms, they regulate your child output (limit 1 I think), and regulate a large part of your life. You sure you would be ok with that life style? What would you do without beng “allowed” to voice your opinion on this wonderful discussion board?
What does Costa Rica produce? Some fruit, coffee (I realize it has other industries). In the Napa Valley the wine producers with their arrogance are paying A million an acre some time ago. Turns out there are many places in the world that produce high quality wine and so it goes with Costa Rica, there are many places that would love to replace Costa Rica. The laws and high caliber of its people are its attraction to foreign investment. Equal protections for all and not by creating a second tax paying class. These new type of laws make investors reevaluate their business plans and possibly not including Costa Rica. Its a big world
Speculative Capital.
I speculate that I will never have enough capital to need to worry about it.
Still not sure if that’s a good thing or a bad thing…
[quote=”kwhite1″]
David, not sure how to take on your statement, almost sounds like you are a defender and advocate of China? I am not the brightest bulb on the tree, but I do know this….the Chinese do not allow you to speak freely, own firearms, they regulate your child output (limit 1 I think), and regulate a large part of your life. You sure you would be ok with that life style? What would you do without beng “allowed” to voice your opinion on this wonderful discussion board?[/quote]I’m not defending China or its policies at all. What I said, and what I meant, was that we Americans have been led to view China through a prism that may not render a totally accurate image. During the Cold War, China, whose existence the U.S. denied for many years, was a primary “enemy”. The government’s propaganda machine spent years vilifying China in all our eyes. That image remains unchanged for many of us. It may, in fact, not be an entirely accurate image. That’s what I said and that’s what I meant.
Facts are, a very large part of my life is already regulated (mostly for the good, but not entirely). My “child output” was voluntarily restricted to zero (one fewer than the Chinese limit), so who cares?. I wouldn’t own a gun whether it was legal to or not. And while it’s an interesting passtime to participate in this forum, and while I do enjoy sharing some of what I’ve learned with others, I could live comfortably without it, as I did for many, many years until 2006.
Truth be told, China may be at the forefront of population control and for that your descendants may thank them profusely. If through firearms control they achieve a firearms death rate to match Great Britain’s, future generations of Chinese will be grateful. And if my thoughts and yours were stifled, who’d be the poorer?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
