Posted on 05/06/2017 11:04:26 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
HR 1813 is not the name of a deadly virus like H1N1. It's the Border Wall Funding Act 2017. Republican Congressman Mike Rogers from Alabama and eight of his colleagues introduced the act on March 30. If approved, it would be as lethal as swine flu. The act would impose a two per cent tax on all remittances from the US to Latin America and the Caribbean. Tax evaders could face up to 20 years in prison and a $500,000 fine.
Jamaica is listed among the foreign countries to which the law would apply. But not Trinidad and Tobago. They're not on the map? How we get mixed up in funding Trump's wall? It's a clear case of 'cyaan ketch Kwaku, yu ketch im shut'. Donald Trump promised his supporters that Mexico would pay for the wall. It seems as if it never occurred to him that the Mexicans would kiss dem teeth and tell him to go to hell.
NBC's comedy show Saturday Night Live did a clever skit on February 4 in which Trump calls the Mexican president, Enrique Pena Nieto. Taking on the role of a scammer, Trump goes straight for the kill: "Congratulations! You've just won a free cruise for two to Hawaii. We just need your country's credit card number." Trump is definitely not as successful as our MoBay experts. Pena Nieto immediately recognises his voice and mockingly says, "We're not paying for the wall, Donald." And hangs up.
Fun and joke aside, Trump now seems to realise that he can't force the Mexicans to pay for his wall. So he tried to get American taxpayers to foot the bill. But Trump couldn't muster enough support from even Republicans to get the wall in the Budget. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer sums up Trump's dilemma this way in a Washington Post article published on May 1: "Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate were closer to one another than Republicans were to Donald Trump."
REMITTANCE MULES
Congressman Mike Rogers and his posse of eight have broadened the search for sacrificial victims. It's all of Latin America and the Caribbean that must now pay for the wall. It's a lunatic proposition. There is no rational basis for it. Why should hard-working American ciitizens and legal immigrants be taxed to send remittances abroad? Even illegal immigrants should not be taxed. They already pay taxes all the time on goods and services. A two per cent tax might sound like nothing to rich people like Donald Trump who are 'smart' enough to evade taxation. But it's a huge burden on the poor.
Furthermore, the proposed tax is counterproductive. By reducing the amount of money sent abroad, the tax would actually increase the likelihood that new migrants would try to get into the US to make money for themselves. Doesn't it occur to the anti-immigration brigade that it would it make more sense to support potential immigrants outside the country with untaxed remittances? Then, in this unconscionable scheme, remittance companies would be paid five per cent of the new taxes they collect to cover their administrative costs. That's on top of their own fee for doing the transfer.
As one of my witty friends says, if the act is passed, a specialist job category would emerge: remittance mules. They would join the band of operatives who are trafficking illegal money across the world. Except that this trafficking would now be in perfectly legal money that the US government would have wickedly turned into contraband as a consequence of the inhumane remittance tax.
FAKE NEWS
The headline of a New York Times article published on February 6, 2017 tells a complicated story. I suppose Donald Trump would say it's fake news: 'California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers'. It's a contradiction that makes perfectly good sense. Vote for Trump and cut off your nose to spite your face: "'If you only have legal labour, certain parts of this industry and this region will not exist,' said Harold McClarty, a fourth-generation farmer in Kingsburg whose operation grows, packs and ships peaches, plums and grapes throughout the country. 'If we sent all these people back, it would be a total disaster.'"
Despite all the evidence that Trump's wall will not stop illegal immigration, he simply refuses to abandon his fantasy. So the petitions keep swirling on the Internet to defeat his plan. The latest I've seen is an appeal to the Caterpillar company: "US President Donald Trump is about to take the next big step to make his 1,600km (1,000-mile) concrete wall along the US-Mexican border a reality. And he wants Caterpillar Inc, one of the world's biggest construction equipment manufacturers, to help build it. Most of the world already sees this wall for what it is: a racist waste of resources and an international symbol of hate. With a majority of Americans against Trump's wall, we think Caterpillar ought to reconsider the business opportunity." Will they?
Even legal farm workers from the Caribbean would be trapped behind Trump's wall. They would be caught in the remittance-tax scam. Caribbean governments must stand up to defend our citizens against exploitation. CARICOM must join with our Latin American counterparts to fight the Border Wall Funding Act. Like it or not, the economies of the region depend on remittances. It's a matter of life and death.
Winning!
This sounds a lot like drug money and drug money is taxed/confiscated at a rate of 100% and any and all confiscated drug money should absolutely be used to pay for the wall from now on. So FU and have a nice day Carolyn.
Hmmm... not seeing the problem. How is $2 per $100 earned and sent out of America to be sent and spent in another country going to be a hardship on anyone besides America? We are the ones suffering from this deal; not the recipients in another country.
If it helps them learn to embrace it maybe they can consider it the cost of doing business and an extremely low cost at that.
Tell the truth. These countries have their panties in a bunch because they simply don't want to help pay for a wall or improved barrier that's needed because their people can't stay in their own country and have to invade other countries illegally because there's not enough work in their own country. Just tell the truth.
>> ... there’s not enough work in their own country.
Gee, I distinctly remember there was lots of work before their country was turned into Junkmaica by the exit of the British.
Well, they got what they wanted - in the ‘60s they were all marching around saying “Black man day come” under their breath. Same with Zimbabyway. IQ is as IQ does.
You could always go back up to 75%.
Just trying to be logical here: The extreme vetting got stopped in the courts because it singled out certain populations. This 2% remittance tax is just begging to be overturned if it singles out Mexico and the Caribbean. It should apply to ALL nations.
I find it instructive that while every American on a retail purchase must pay about 7% in taxes for reasons that are completely opaque:
this easily 2% tax for in an incredibly tangible, explicable reason is soon as some kind of incredible outrage and unbearable.
Mexico is already paying. Congress won’t give Trump that money or any money. It always depended on congress. If Mexico wrote a check it would by law have to go into the treasury
What a poorly written article! But the 2% remittance is just fine if a bit too low.
Make it TEN PERCENT!
Carolyn Cooper CD is a West Indian
author and literary scholar. Born
in Jamaica, she is a professor of
Literary and Cultural Studies at
the University of the West Indies,
Mona, Jamaica. Born: 1950, Jamaica
Education: University of the West
Indies, University of Toronto
That makes as much sense as "Despite all the evidence that brakes will not stop car crashes...". It is one of many methods required to greatly reduce illegal immigration.
Can it stop it alone? No, because about half of illegal immigration is from visa overstays. But it can greatly reduce the number sneaking across the border. Add in full tracking of those entering and leaving the county (which was promised immediately after 9/11 over 15 years ago and every warehouse in the country seems to be able to handle) and better enforcement of employment verification so illegal immigration becomes much more difficult. Will it stop 100%? No. But if all of these reduce it by 90% they will greatly aid the county.
We should tax remittances from the US to ALL countries. That way, there’s no discrimination.
Including corporate money. Balance with lowered business taxes in other areas. Its easier than a tariff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.