You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The number of people under NSA surveillance increased since 2015
Off shore assets are completely legal. How does that justify surveillance? Tax evasion would justify surveillance obviously or people who go online claiming they'll never pay taxes.
As far as reporting requirements go, don't you think it's evil for the IRS to spend so much resources enforcing laws without even letting us know which laws apply to us? They have resources to do chain analysis but can't give us guidance? It seems as if there is nothing any of us can do to reduce our risk of being criminalized.
Many years ago, the prevalence of off-shore bank accounts prompted a crusade for surveillance related to US citizen's holdings in off-shore assets (The Bank Secrecy Act and FATCA Act). The items I discuss above are largely related to crime deterrence. I am not saying that makes it right for the government to have surveillance for any reason they see fit (although I am ok with with it for counter-terrorism purposes). In fact, even the mandated foreign information reporting requirements on everyday people (and even corporations) is very burdensome in its current state. There are so many forms that if not filed correctly carry a potential $10,000 USD penalty. In my opinion, the IRS/government should set dollar thresholds to weed out ordinary folks from the burdensome requirements. The Form 114 requirement for example starts at $10,000, is that really necessary, why not make it $1 million? We do deserve clear guidance as US citizens, absolutely agree. I view these forms as burdensome for any person to do by themselves without an advisor. Especially since, it is the criminals the IRS is targeting that are the least likely to fill out the forms in the first place - irony at its best.