Support NeoGAF

[Loki]

Wow...


Source

Selected excerpts:

The world's richest individuals have placed $11.5 trillion of assets in offshore havens, mainly as a tax avoidance measure. The shock new figure - 10 times Britain's GDP - is contained in the most authoritative study of the wealth held in offshore accounts ever conducted.

The study, by Tax Justice Network, a group of accountants and economists concerned at the escalating wealth held in offshore locations, shows that the world's high-net-worth individuals earn $860 billion each year from their assets.

But there is growing alarm among regulators and campaigners because exchequers worldwide are missing out on at least $255bn of tax each year. Governments appear unable, or unwilling, to prevent the rich employing aggressive strategies to minimise their tax liabilities.

The $11.5trn does not include the vast amount of money stashed in tax havens by multinational corporations, which are using increasingly sophisticated techniques to run rings round the authorities.

(Emphasis mine)


These figures fall in line with recent IRS estimates that the US alone loses $45-75B per year in tax revenue due to individual offshore banking; corporate offshoring was believed to cost us another $65-95B annually, for a total of ~$110-170B in lost revenue per annum.


Meanwhile, the majority of Americans can barely afford housing, educational costs, and soaring prices for everything from gas, to clothes, to health care. Before anyone sounds off about how the rich "already pay the majority of the taxes in this country", allow me to say two things:


1) Yes, they do-- but it is still not in proportion to the amount of wealth that they control, nor their percentage of the national income (speaking here of both earned and unearned income). That is, the top 2% may very well pay 40-50% of all taxes, but they control 60+% of the wealth; as seen above, they frequently shuttle these assets to offshore tax havens.

2) They should be made to pay what they owe by law, the same as everyone else does. It is not their place to decide, "hey, I don't agree with this law, so I'll try to bypass it by any means necessary." That said, it is the government's fault for not putting the screws to these individuals and companies, and I think we're all aware of why they haven't...


My point in posting this thread was simply to marvel at the sheer cupidity of our modern day robber barons. I sometimes wonder if they realize what effect their absurd accumulation of wealth, and their refusal to honor their social obligations, actually has on society, but then I realize that they most likely do know-- they just don't care. Immoderation in every other sphere-- be it drink, or sex, or food, or interpersonally (in terms of being a churl)-- is rightly seen as vice, yet in the economic sphere, gross intemperance masquerades as virtue; indeed, the pursuit of ludicrous sums of money as an end unto itself has been unduly apotheosized by our culture. I shudder to think of what the world will look like in 30-40 years, because the only thing I know for certain is that it'll look nothing like it does today. It simply can't, as the current trends are, in my opinion, unsustainable.

 

[Loki]

Bumped for the evening crowd. Based on the incredible reception this topic received earlier, I'm predicting great things...

 

[WedgeX]

Holy CRAP.

Just for reference, do you have any links pertaining to this quote?

1) Yes, they do-- but it is still not in proportion to the amount of wealth that they control, nor their percentage of the national income (speaking here of both earned and unearned income). That is, the top 2% may very well pay 40-50% of all taxes, but they control 60+% of the wealth; as seen above, they frequently shuttle these assets to offshore tax havens.

So if it comes up anywhere else I can use it as reference?

 

[Zaptruder]

That kinda money could be used to 'fix their world'.... which in turn brings about more money for them. Relatively less, to everyone else, but relatively more to what they have now!

 

[AntoneM]

the shocking thing about this news is that it's not shocking

 

[Loki]

WedgeX:


http://202.121.129.66/transcend/www.aei.org/cs/cs12058.htm

Look at the very bottom of the page and note that, for 1998, the top 1% controlled roughly 34% of the total wealth in the US. Though there isn't a breakdown by percent of the next decile (i.e., the 90-99th percentiles), the general trend is toward more concentration of wealth the farther up one progresses on the scale-- so the 98-99th percentile is likely going to hold a substantial portion of the overall wealth, say perhaps another 6-8% of the overall wealth. So you're looking at 40+% of the wealth being concentrated in the top 2% of earners' hands. Ridiculous however you slice it.


Here's another source, along with the relevant graphic:

Believe me when I tell you that this has only increased since 1998; in addition, much wealth held by the top 1-2% is left undeclared as described in the topic post. According to the above chart, I'd speculate that the top 2% control roughly 46-48% of the nation's wealth (again, there's no breakdown by percentile after the top 1%). The page linked to above states, as the pie chart above illustrates, that the top 1% control more wealth than the bottom 90% of society. It's a shameful situation, really, and is to my mind indefensible. Even if the numbers are off by a percent or two, the overall trend is clear-- and striking. It paints a bleak picture for the future health and sustainability of our society.



max_cool, I know it's not shocking-- this is just the first time I've seen an actual number attached to just how much money is tied up (read: hidden) in offshore banks. Revolting.

 

[Loki]

Cyan, are you wealthy? Because I've never heard of anyone of moderate means using an offshore bank for purposes of tax evasion (assuming that's why you used it). Then again, you could have been joking and just meant that you have money tied up in a foreign bank in a country in which you lived previously, and I'm inclined to believe that's what you meant, since you've never struck me as a scofflaw.

 

[Drinky Crow]

I sent this article to a Libertarian friend.

His answer: "well, if they weren't taxed unfairly, rich folks wouldn't have to take such measures!"

 

[Loki]

I sent this article to a Libertarian friend.

His answer: "well, if they weren't taxed unfairly, rich folks wouldn't have to take such measures!"

How the hell are the super-wealthy "taxed unfairly" when the top marginal rate is stable after about $250K/yr, iirc? If anything, it's those families earning $250K/yr in major metropolises (where cost of living can be astronomical) who feel the squeeze. As your annual income inches upwards towards $1M/yr, offshore tax havens seem more and more appealing, as this study attests to. Due to such chicanery, a person earning, say, $10M/yr pays significantly less than the top marginal rate due to both offshoring as well as accounting loopholes.


You should also ask your friend if he believes that everyone should be able to pick and choose which laws they comply with based on their subjective estimation of its propriety. I'm telling you (and I'm sure you already know), the future of this country isn't going to be pretty if current trends continue. I'm generally not alarmist, but anyone who has eyes can see trouble brewing on the horizon; concentration of wealth has now reached it's highest levels since prior to the Great Depression (and is, in fact, equivalent to the levels seen then believe it or not). This insane stratification was one of the factors which precipitated the Depression, not to mention fomenting revolutions throughout history.



It's all very sad. : / We're being duped...

 

[Triumph]

Loki, why do you hate freedom?

 

[Drinky Crow]

Loki, I've repeated that argument countless times to him, and it always comes back to the irrational comment of "the rich people earn their money, why should they have to pay more than everyone else?" Occasionally he takes it further into the realms of pure denial with "why do liberals want to punish rich people for being smarter/better? Are you just jealous?"

 

[Funky Papa]

OK, I don't usually enter into political threads but I must ask you something Drinky:

Is your friend rich?

Because if he is not, he deserves a beat down.

 

[levious]

that's enough lost revenue to make our illegal immigrant problem seem petty huh Loki?

Also, I had meant to respond to this last night when I saw it on page two, but must have forgotten... cool find, and very interesting.

 

[nitewulf]

i cant even imagine 11.5 trillion dollars...thats beyond my imagination.

 

[Loki]

Doug, you should ask him what he means by "pay more"-- does he mean in absolute dollars or as a percentage of income? If the latter, point out that people earning $10M+ per year don't even pay as much as those earning $250K/yr in terms of percentage of income, since the former group actively takes advantage of shady accounting practices and offshore banking whereas those earning "only" $250K usually do not (at least not to the same extent). Ask him why he feels that the mega-rich shouldn't have to pay the exact same percentage of their income as those who earn a fraction of what they earn do. Since he seems to be concerned with them paying "more" than others, if you phrase it in such a way, he'll have no choice but to admit that-- as a percentage of income (earned and unearned)-- the super-rich do not pay more than others, and in fact pay less.


Now, if he means that those who earn astronomical sums of money shouldn't have to pay more than others in terms of their absolute dollar contribution to the tax base (i.e., that everyone should just hand the gov't $10K/yr regardless of whether they make $50K/yr or $50M), then he's clearly beyond help and should be committed posthaste.


Considering that you still count him among your friends, you're a better man than I am, that's for sure. Certainly much more patient, at least.


EDIT: By the way, you should tell him that the rich don't "earn" the majority of their money. If he insists that they do, you should goad him into an expostulation of his beliefs regarding what constitutes "earning" money. He doesn't sound like the deepest person, and I doubt he'd be able to make the relevant distinctions. Then again, I can't picture you hanging out with "dumb" people (well, at least before you mentioned this particular friend ), so perhaps he could...

 

[Loki]

that's enough last revenue to make our illegal immigrant problem seem petty huh Loki?

Sure. But unlike some other people, I call a spade a spade wherever I find it. The fact that greater wrongs are being committed does not change the fact that illegal immigration is a blight on this country for various reasons (financially, ethically in terms of undermining the rule of law, secuirty-wise etc.). All people should adhere to the rule of law-- rich people, illegal immigrants etc. I open my mouth whenever I see a wrong being perpetrated; for what it's worth, I've spoken out on corporate malfeasance and the excesses of the super-rich far more frequently than I have on illegal immigration-- I certainly know that I've never started a topic dealing with illegal immigration.


So if you were not-so-subtly suggesting that I've been misguided in my condemnation of certain things, or that my energies would have been better spent examining other issues (such as this one), I'd beg to differ.



EDIT:

Loki, why do you hate freedom?

I dunno. I just can't help myself.

 

[levious]

So if you were not-so-subtly suggesting that I've been misguided in my condemnation of certain things, or that my energies would have been better spent examining other issues (such as this one), I'd beg to differ.

not at all... just it put things in perspective for me at least. And that similar groups of people benefit from both this and illegal immigration I'd say both problems are unlikely to be fixed at all.

I have no problem with your views in illegals anyway.

 

[Drinky Crow]

He makes less than half of what I do and has credit card debt through the roof. He just thinks he's super-special and destined for greatness, even though he works as an assistant nurse. He firmly believes he's better and smarter than 99% of the folks out there, and that one day the world will recognize him, and he doesn't want the government keeping him down. He likes to quote Harrison Bergeron and note that the status quo wants to cripple him for their own sense of security, utterly failing to miss the obvious: he *is* one of the status quo, ambitions and all.


As for taxes:

He is, of course, talking about both absolute dollar values as well as ignoring the many, many intangibles the wealthy take away from the stable, secure society that permitted them, as largely white males of middle-to-upper class parentage, to accumulate capital relatively unobstructed.

He's actually a pretty cool dude, otherwise, and I beat his ass hard in political arguments. All the evidence I throw at him won't change a deeply-held personal belief easily, though, and unfortunately, that's something *I* have to acknowledge.

 

[Loki]

not at all... just it put things in perspective for me at least. And that similar groups of people benefit from both this and illegal immigration I'd say both problems are unlikely to be fixed at all.

I have no problem with your views in illegals anyway.

Ah, I see. Of course, I have perspective too, but I also have very strong beliefs regarding many issues; so when speaking on this or that topic, it might very well seem that I view it as the "be all end all" issue due to the intensity/length of my remarks. I assure you that that's not the case. If people asked me what the biggest problem facing the US (and the world, really) today is, I'd say corporations and the excesses of the wealthy without hesitation. Its effects are felt everywhere.


Your point about similar groups of people benefiting from both of these issues is spot-on, btw. And no, I don't believe it will ever change, unfortunately.

 

[Triumph]

God. You people just don't get it, do you? Rich people are rich because they're better than you. They're born that way and it's something you just don't understand.

Next thing you know, you'll be pointing out that the estate tax or so called "death tax" has never cost a farmer's family their farm or in fact cost anyone with an estate valued less than $10 million much of anything. And you'll be wanting to tax wealth because it just sits there and does nothing to stimulate the economy or help those in lower income brackets with all of the interest that it accumulates yearly. Or heaven's forbid you'll pull some crazy Ralph Nader idea out of your ass about wanting to charge a penny fee on every stock transaction in America, thereby creating billions of dollars in government revenue annually and helping to provide health care for all of the lesser plebians and even potentially wipe out poverty.

What is WRONG with you people? And is that a guillotine you're building on the Capitol steps? Oh my!

 

[Loki]

He makes less than half of what I do and has credit card debt through the roof. He just thinks he's super-special and destined for greatness, even though he works as an assistant nurse. He firmly believes he's better and smarter than 99% of the folks out there, and that one day the world will recognize him, and he doesn't want the government keeping him down. He likes to quote Harrison Bergeron and note that the status quo wants to cripple him for their own sense of security, utterly failing to miss the obvious: he *is* one of the status quo, ambitions and all.

:lol

This sounds all too familiar, actually. I've long said that one of the biggest tragedies of our times is the fact that even decidedly average people (average in terms of their gifts, talents, wealth etc.) have been hoodwinked into swallowing the "free market" line propagated in the media by the ruling elites. It just goes to show you that people can be made to believe anything, even to the core of their being, regardless of how adversely that belief affects their personal circumstance. Unbelievable. Like lemmings, we march.


I always like to point out to such laissez-faire capitalists that during the period of greatest economic growth in this country (which-- surprise!-- coincided with the best quality of life for the largest part of the populace), the top tax rate was anywhere from 70-90%, and it stayed that way until Reagan lowered it to roughly 45% iirc. It has only been further reduced since (it stands at ~36% now, iirc, and even this is not paid, as per the topic post), and we can see the deterioration of our society all around us as a consequence.

As for taxes:

He is, of course, talking about both absolute dollar values

Holy shit-- so he thinks that someone should be able to earn $40M/yr and not have to pay more in taxes than someone earning $120K? Wow...I'm speechless.


Like I said, you're a better man than I.

 

[Triumph]

:lol

This sounds all too familiar, actually. I've long said that one of the biggest tragedies of our times is the fact that even decidedly average people (average in terms of their gifts, talents, wealth etc.) have been hoodwinked into swallowing the "free market" line propagated in the media by the ruling elites. It just goes to show you that people can be made to believe anything, even to the core of their being, regardless of how adversely that belief affects their personal circumstance. Unbelievable. Like lemmings, we march.


I always like to point out to such laissez-faire capitalists that during the period of greatest economic growth in this country (which-- surprise!-- coincided with the best quality of life for the largest part of the populace), the top tax rate was anywhere from 70-90%, and it stayed that way until Reagan lowered it to roughly 45% iirc. It has only been further reduced since, and we can see the deterioration of our society all around us as a consequence.

OH MY JESUS IN HEAVEN PROTECT THE FREE MARKETS!!!

Seriously. Are you trying to advocate *wink wink nudge nudge* SOCIALISM???

 

[Funky Papa]

I just can't imagine how libertarian theories are supposed to help Joe-low wage, who happens to be a large part of the population.

 

[WedgeX]

Thanks for the links Loki...quite informative, and kind of surprising.

 

[Drinky Crow]

I think he also has a very simplistic view of taxes and society: that taxes are a sort of "participation fee," and that all people should be charged the same fee, regardless of wealth or circumstance. To him, it's like going to the county fair and having to pay $185 for admission instead of $6 just because you pulled up in a Porsche instead of a Pinto. Wealth is just a personal attribute to him and a number of white males from privileged households like him, not a responsibility with implications that extend deeply outside of one's own personal sphere.

It's a spurious and dangerously incorrect view of the need and purpose of taxation and opportunity as well as wealth but like I said, when an analogy is accepted at the corse of a person's ideology, it's very hard for them to let go of it.

 

[Crandle]

A libertarian should want to get rid of the income tax (federal one, at least), yes, because it either violates the natural right to property or discourages economic production, if you're going by a utilitarian POV.

But a good libertarian should want to retain certain taxes as well, e.g. corporate ones (they're thankfully "people" legally, you'd have constant bankruptcies otherwise, but not morally), sales tax (with certain household staples exempt) and all kinds of consumption taxes (carbon, land use, whatever).

Geez. Not all of us are dribbling anarcho-capitalists, you know. We just want to lop a big chunk off the size of government and increase personal freedom and force businesses to internalize their externalities (since they won't, and actually shouldn't, do it themselves) and hopefully also dial down that whole "foreign wars" deal.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Wealth and money is more than just property, though, especially in this day and age. Wealth and money are receipts that can be redeemed for opportunity, and with the opportunity comes responsibilities well beyond the scope of the "owner" that must be managed and mitigated by society -- and society likewise needs recompense in order to preserve opportunity. Money, by its very nature, is more than just paper with IOU values attached; it brings a very complicated overhead along with it that requires a society to validate and preserve it and its owner.

 

[Loki]

OH MY JESUS IN HEAVEN PROTECT THE FREE MARKETS!!!

Seriously. Are you trying to advocate *wink wink nudge nudge* SOCIALISM???

No, not at all-- you should know better than that. Even though Doug thinks that my descent into socialism is "inevitable." :lol


I firmly believe in capitalism, but I also firmly believe in commen sense, common decency, and the concept of limits. I know I sound like a broken record at times, but temperance is really one of my core values when examining any sort of policy or action. Unfettered capitalism is too indulgent, too unequal, and this has severe systemic effects. A more even-handed, moderate capitalism, with an eye towards the greater good, would be better in my opinion. We only really had that for a period of roughly 40-45 years (post-Depression until the late 70's/early 80's; some of the prosperity of our society then was undoubtedly due to the wartime boom, but it didn't abate-- even decades after the war-- until social and fiscal policy was enacted which precipitated our slide towards what we witness today).


The entire cultural ethic-- especially in the business world-- has morphed into something grotesque. If you do some research and look at the articles and commentary in prominent business weeklies and economic journals from the 50's-70's, you'd see an across-the-board eschewal of the very same values and beliefs that are enshrined in the present day. Even very wealthy people, by and large, shunned such values and practices as distasteful and improper. Now such conduct is seen as routine, necessary, and laudable. It's really a disgrace. All that's changed is our values as a culture, and the causes for that are manifold, and beyond the scope of this topic. It's a very unfortunate situation, however, and I know that I'm not the only one who laments it.

 

[AirBrian]

Here's the tax info from the IRS (2002 is the latest data):

Top 01% pays 33.71% of all income taxes
Top 05% pays 53.80% of all income taxes
Top 10% pays 65.73% of all income taxes
Top 25% pays 83.90% of all income taxes
Top 50% pays 96.50% of all income taxes

IRS link:

http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/pub/irs-soi/02in01ts.xls

(The percentages are in the last section of the last table.)

Other useful links regarding taxes:

http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/taxstats/index.html
http://www.taxfoundation.org/index.html

 

[Crandle]

Wealth and money is more than just property, though, especially in this day and age. Wealth and money are recepts that can be redeemed for opportunity, and with the opportunity comes responsibilities well beyond the scope of the "owner" that must be managed and mitigated by society -- and society likewise needs recompense in order to preserve opportunity.

Fair point (this is why I support public education, actually). You can question whether a guy who makes millions in stocks is really mixin' his labor as Locke imagined. Personally, I would much prefer an estate tax to even taking a slice from the more nebulous sources of income, since a reasonable tax on inheritance wouldn't really discourage anything beyond lazy-ass children. But even a very small tax on income...I could handle it. I'm more of a macroeconomic Hayek type anyway.

I think you could cut the federal government, at least, by half (it's currently at 30-33% of GDP, IIRC) and not do great damage to the ideal of opportunity in the U.S. I mean, it's not like I just want stricter welfare and less regulations and other nasty mean-spirited things. The military budget is ridiculous. Couple that smaller central government with the kind of strong federalism neither major party cares about anymore (Californians can keep on having lots of government spending if they wish, it's no skin off my nose) and I think people would be much better off. Bush and co. aren't really capitalist so much as they are corporatist. Adam Smith would retch at the Medicare and Social Security giveaways (the government's still creating a pension for you, but now Wall Street gets free cash!)

 

[Loki]

Here's the tax info from the IRS (2002 is the latest data):

Top 01% pays 33.71% of all income taxes
Top 05% pays 53.80% of all income taxes
Top 10% pays 65.73% of all income taxes
Top 25% pays 83.90% of all income taxes
Top 50% pays 96.50% of all income taxes

Just in case you were trying to make a "pro-wealthy dude" argument by posting that data, take note of point #1 in my initial post.


The top 1% pays 33% of all income taxes, yet has nearly 40% of all wealth in the US (likely more by now; I don't have recent data). So yes, they pay a lot of taxes (as they should; the rate is not progressive beyond $250K/yr income), but that's still not in proportion to the amount of money they control. Note also that income tax is supposed to be paid on both earned and unearned income (dividends, bank interest etc.), yet $11.2 trillion worldwide is being hidden in offshore accounts to avoid paying what is owed; the IRS estimates that the US alone loses anwhere from $110-170B in tax revenue per year. So despite what they pay, they're clearly ripping us off and flouting the law. Why is that tolerated? How is that justifiable? Ask yourself that.


Assuming that's why you posted it, of course. If not, take my vehemence in stride.

 

[pestul]

Here's the tax info from the IRS (2002 is the latest data):

Top 01% pays 33.71% of all income taxes
Top 05% pays 53.80% of all income taxes
Top 10% pays 65.73% of all income taxes
Top 25% pays 83.90% of all income taxes
Top 50% pays 96.50% of all income taxes

IRS link:

http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/pub/irs-soi/02in01ts.xls

(The percentages are in the last section of the last table.)

Other useful links regarding taxes:

http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/taxstats/index.html
http://www.taxfoundation.org/index.html

Which seems entirely fair based on the graph posted earlier..

 

[Triumph]

No, not at all-- you should know better than that. Even though Doug thinks that my descent into socialism is "inevitable." :lol


I firmly believe in capitalism, but I also firmly believe in commen sense, common decency, and the concept of limits. I know I sound like a broken record at times, but temperance is really one of my core values when examining any sort of policy or action. Unfettered capitalism is too indulgent, too unequal, and this has severe systemic effects. A more even-handed, moderate capitalism, with an eye towards the greater good, would be better in my opinion. We only really had that for a period of roughly 40-45 years (post-Depression until the late 70's/early 80's; some of the prosperity of our society then was undoubtedly due to the wartime boom, but it didn't abate-- even decades after the war-- until social and fiscal policy was enacted which precipitated our slide towards what we witness today).


The entire cultural ethic-- especially in the business world-- has morphed into something grotesque. If you do some research and look at the articles and commentary in prominent business weeklies and economic journals from the 50's-70's, you'd see an across-the-board eschewal of the very same values and beliefs that are enshrined in the present day. Even very wealthy people, by and large, shunned such values and practices as distasteful and improper. Now such conduct is seen as routine, necessary, and laudable. It's really a disgrace. All that's changed is our values as a culture, and the causes for that are manifold, and beyond the scope of this topic. It's a very unfortunate situation, however, and I know that I'm not the only one who laments it.

I agree with Doug. Sooner or later you're going to realize that there's no compromising with these bastard whoresons, there is no trying to reason with them. Someone is going to have to take what they have by force and fix things. Should be fun!

 

[Loki]

I agree with Doug. Sooner or later you're going to realize that there's no compromising with these bastard whoresons, there is no trying to reason with them.

Oh, I know there's no reasoning with such people, which is why I feel that things will never truly change, unfortunately. However, my disagreement with the worldview and actions of such people does not mean that I then have to adopt the polar opposite stance, as that would be a bit too reactionary for my tastes. My views on things have been arrived at through reflection and consideration, and, as I understand them in their totality, they cohere quite nicely. There's no reason for me to fix what isn't broken (on my part). The system (and our society) may be broken, but the way I personally feel things should be is quite fine, and quite consistent, to my mind.

 

[AirBrian]

Just in case you were trying to make a "pro-wealthy dude" argument by posting that data, take note of point #1 in my initial post.


The top 1% pays 33% of all income taxes, yet has nearly 40% of all wealth in the US (likely more by now; I don't have recent data). So yes, they pay a lot of taxes (as they should; the rate is not progressive beyond $250K/yr income), but that's still not in proportion to the amount of money they control. Note also that income tax is supposed to be paid on both earned and unearned income (dividends, bank interest etc.), yet $11.2 trillion worldwide is being hidden in offshore accounts to avoid paying what is owed; the IRS estimates that the US alone loses anwhere from $110-170B in tax revenue per year. So despite what they pay, they're clearly ripping us off and flouting the law. Why is that tolerated? How is that justifiable? Ask yourself that.


Assuming that's why you posted it, of course. If not, take my vehemence in stride.

I didn't post it for that reason -- some people wanting to see the data and I had it handy. No worries though.

I really don't care about this issue that much. However, corporate taxation (or the lack thereof) really chaps my hide.

 

[Loki]

I didn't post it for that reason -- some people wanting to see the data and I had it handy. No worries though.

I really don't care about this issue that much. However, corporate taxation (or the lack thereof) really chaps my hide.

Ah, ok. Cool.

 

[Loki]

Yeah, I figured. And I can't see why you'd have to pay taxes on it since it was placed in the account before you came to the states. It would be as if you came to the US with, say, $20K to your name-- they don't just tax you upon entry. Worst case scenario, you have to go to Ireland physically and withdraw it, though I doubt it (I'm not too familiar with tax law ).