Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has a status update for Facebook co-founderEduardo Saverin: Stop attempting to dodge your taxes by renouncing your U.S. citizenship or never come to back to the U.S. again.

In September 2011, Saverin relinquished his U.S. citizenship before the company announced its planned initial public offering of stock, which will debut this week. The move was likely a financial one, as he owns an estimated 4 percent of Facebook and stands to make $4 billion when the company goes public. Saverin would reap the benefit of tax savings by becoming a permanent resident of Singapore, which levies no capital gains taxes.

At a news conference this morning, Sens. Schumer and Bob Casey, D-Pa., will unveil the “Ex-PATRIOT” – “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy” – Act to respond directly to Saverin’s move, which they dub a “scheme” that would “help him duck up to $67 million in taxes.”

The senators will call Saverin’s move an “outrage” and will outline their plan to re-impose taxes on expatriates like Saverin even after they flee the United States and take up residence in a foreign country. Their proposal would also impose a mandatory 30 percent tax on the capital gains of anybody who renounces their U.S. citizenship.

The plan would bar individuals like Saverin from ever reentering the United States again.

“Eduardo recently found it more practical to become a resident of Singapore since he plans to live there for an indefinite period of time,” Tom Goodman, Saverin’s spokesman, told Bloomberg News in an email.

Last year 1,700 people renounced their U.S. citizenship.

Source: ABC News.

• New documents disclose $500,000 tab Michelle Obama left  for taxpayers
• Voters sour on Obamas’ lifestyle that critics call ‘tone-deaf’ and ‘hypocritical’
• New video reveals First Lady’s ‘fantasy’ to sneak way from Secret Service
• Mrs Obama mulls political future and possibility of Presidential run

Legislation allows IRS to revoke passports, mandates black boxes in vehicles.

Democrats are trying to ram through a notorious transportation bill stuffed with Big Brother measures, including empowering the IRS to revoke passports of accused tax delinquents and enforcing mandatory black boxes in all new cars from 2015 onwards, by forcing the Republican-controlled House to pass the Senate version of the legislation.

Late yesterday afternoon, “the House turned away an attempt by Democrats to speed up the conference by instructing House negotiators to accept the Senate-passed bill. That bill, S. 1813, would fund federal highway programs for two years, a plan Democrats prefer over the House-passed bill that only extends funding through September,”reports the Hill.

The Senate bill, also known as the ‘Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act’ (MAP-21), is very different from the House version in that it not only outlines funding for federal highway programs but also includes innumerable nightmarish provisions that butcher privacy rights. The bill will now go to conference and lawmakers will attempt to come to an agreement on the final version of the legislation.

A list of the conferees who will work with the bill’s chief sponsor Barbara Boxer to resolve differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill includes Jay Rockefeller, who advocated warrantless spying on American citizens back in 2008.

Should lawmakers from both sides of the aisle be unable to come to a compromise, “Congress could pass the Senate-approved bill, S. 1813, and then pass a technical corrections bill to address these differences,” according to Transportation and Infrastructure Committee ranking member Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.).

“What they want to do is cast the participation of the House of Representatives aside, and just adopt what the Senate has brought forward,” warned Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica (R-Fla.).

The bill has attracted widespread criticism for a number of fourth amendment-busting provisions that empower the federal government to spy on American citizens.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

The environmental agenda has been infected by extremism—it’s become an economic suicide pact. And we’re here to challenge it. On Earth Day, visit http://freemarketamerica.org/

If I Wanted America to Fail.

*Written by L.B. Frank.

Wow, was I in for a surprise last night. I had the pleasure of attending a US Congressional Candidate Forum for District 19 last night. I’m not going to say what state I live in, nor the names of the people running for office. I will make up names for them that better exude their personality or my impression of them. The following are my thoughts on the questions and their answers.

There were 8 candidates on stage last night. We had a Mitt Romney Wannabe, a Lawyer Kid, a Guy They Say doesn’t have a Chance, a Bean Counter from Washington, a Mitt Romney Wannabe #2, a Duck Phillips, a Formerly Libertarian Leaning Radio Show Host, and a Democrat. 7 of the 8 people on stage are running in the Republican Primary for US Congressional Seat 19 in our district, the last guy is the only Democrat running for the seat.

They were asked a series of questions off of the GOOOH questionnaire, and a series of questions from the audience. I submitted three questions, and none were asked. Boo. They were asked the questions, and then they had to hold up a red or green sign whether they were for or against the topic.

The first question was “Would you support any legislation that would alter the promise made to those 55 and up when it comes to their Social Security benefits?”.  All but one said “No”. That is “No” to privatizing, “No” to voluntary disassociation, “No” to raising the cap, “No” to lowering benefits. The Formerly  Libertarian Leaning Radio Show Host was the only one that said we have a $16 trillion dollar debt, and was the only one that would say that we had to look at everything on the table. I can respect that. I submitted a question to be asked, that wasn’t, “Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme?” The way that Social Security is run right now, it’s relying on the forced confiscation of wealth earned by tax payers in the form of FICA withholdings on their paychecks. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Social Security will run out of money and be in perpetual RED in as little as 2016. The last time I looked at the calendar, it’s 2012. So, in an effort to garner the votes and campaign donations from the nearly 300 people in attendance, they said “No, I would rather let the Social Security bankrupt our country instead of tell you the truth”.

The second question was “Would you support any legislation that would alter, remove, abolish the Tax Code as it stand now and replace it with a flat tax or the FairTax?” All Greens on stage. The Lawyer Kid said basically that he supports a flat tax and the FairTax is dangerous. The FairTax is a 194 page legislation, but takes an over 400 page book to explain. That is not even remotely true. The FairTax legislation is 133 pages as written today, the book written by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder is  188 pages, that includes the Table of Contents and the Index in the back. He said it was dangerous because we don’t know what it will do, but it is wholly acceptable to support a flat tax, even thought that only adds to the complexity of the 3 million word, 76,000 page Tax Code we currently have today. He was saying that it is wholly acceptable to only tax producers in our economy. He was saying that is wholly acceptable to continue to have the world’s highest corporate tax rate. He was saying that it is wholly acceptable to keep the IRS to track you down and put you in a cage if you make a mistake on your tax forms and point a gun at you and force you to pay your taxes in weekly withholdings, whether you can afford it or not. He completely misunderstood and misrepresented the FairTax, where there are no corporate taxes, where you don’t have to file taxes, where you keep 100 percent of your income and investments. Only The Guy They Say Doesn’t Have a Chance said that the FairTax returns the tax system to the original constitutional restrictions and treats everyone equally, removes loop holes and lobbyists. The rest of them basically said, “Yeah, pander, pander, pander.” No solutions, nothing. If we want to get serious in this country about the economy, about jobs, about the future, we have to look at a solution that is simple and makes sense that also takes power out of the hands of government and returns it to the people. The FairTax is that solution. If only these people on stage would stand behind it, they promise “To fight for you!” Bull, show me by supporting legislation that will get the government out of my finances, out of my pay check and won’t throw me in jail if I don’t understand something with 76,000 pages and 3,000,000 words.

Later the question was asked, “Would you support any efforts to use legislation to decriminalize marijuana?” Now, I’m going to be as honest as I can, even though I’m writing on the Internet where nothing is true yet everything is believable. I have never smoked marijuana. I have never put any drugs into my body other than alcohol, caffeine, and medications. It’s not something that appeals to me. But, I am a warrior for freedom. I am a defender of liberty. And when I heard this question last night, I thought “Finally! A question that actually has value!” Nope. These so-called liberty-loving Republican candidates said “NOPE”. The Repubs all raised the red flag of the War on Drugs. The Lawyer Kid said “It’s a gateway drug, it’s dangerous, I don’t want kids smoking it and also there is this thing in the Constitution called the Commerce Clause, so yeah, I don’t think it’s a good idea.” The rest of them parroted his sentiments. Even though I know at least one of them on that stage has smoked before. “Commerce Clause??” Really? If the user grows the plant themselves, in their own garden, on their own property, and uses it in their own home, while consenting to administering the smoke of some sort of vegetation into his or her own body and THAT is enough justifiable reason for the imperial federal government to reach into your home and yank you out and put you into a cage?

“Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: [The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes”

Where does it say that they have the authority to do so? These people, these men, these human beings, are appealing to us, the audience, the voters, more human beings, for  the authority and permission to hire men with guns to tell us how we are allowed to live. Don’t ever forget that. These holier than thou, righteous men want the power to tell you what you must do, what you are not allowed to do in your own home.

“IV Amendment of the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”

I’m sorry, but that is just wrong. And the worst part, the audience applauded them. Freedom dies every time the audience applauds unjust laws. They got us into $16 Trillion in debt, the “War on Drugs” has cost us a trillion dollars. After 40 years of this, even U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske concedes the strategy hasn’t worked. “In the grand scheme, it has not been successful, forty years later, the concern about drugs and drug problems is, if anything, magnified, intensified.” We have already tried the whole prohibition thing, it doesn’t work. Violent cartels are making hundreds of millions, we are paying hundreds of millions to imprison hundreds of thousands for victimless crimes, we paying billions in a “war effort” that doesn’t make sense. If someone has a drug problem, they can be treated just like someone with an alcohol problem. If they are caught driving while intoxicated, treat them the same as with alcohol. The whole supply/demand paradigm works with drugs too, the demand is still there today, after forty years, but supplies are scarcer due to the black market effect and it raises the cost. If you increase the risk, you increase the cost. As the costs go up, but demand stays the same, the risk taking to get the money to purchase the product goes up, thus crime, violent crime. That is what should be punished and that is what would go down. Market forces would reduce the prices of the goods; reduce the crimes inherent in procuring the goods, tax dollars won’t go to waste in incarcerations. debt goes down.

If the thought that if it is dangerous and therefore should be outlawed is true, the candidates should have proposed to outlaw cotton candy, hamburgers and alcohol, among everything else in life. Too much of anything is bad for the body, the best way to reduce its use is through education and not more guns and more political power.

This Lawyer Kid and the rest of them are just pandering to the masses, while trying to sound strong, and in effect, trample on the Constitution, our Rights, they are treating us adults as children. We have brains, we can think, we don’t need a government to make decisions for us, and these people are trying to get the power to do so.

They asked a bunch more questions, like about ending the Federal Reserve, they all send “No”. “We need market stability” and crap like that. As if the market was worse prior to the Fed, fiat currency and so forth.

I walked away with more disgust in my stomach than anything else. They were cheered; it was like those in the audience didn’t even listen to them. “Yay! Take more of my rights away!” Remember the old saying “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure”? It’s the same thing with rights, just because you don’t use all of your rights, there might be someone else that does. Just because you don’t value some of your rights, doesn’t mean that there is another person’s freedoms being trampled on, and if their freedoms are being trampled on, so are yours.

This primary season and this November, please remember to vote on principles. Vote on what your heart tells you. Read the Constitution and vote down the line on what the Constitution authorizes and nothing else. These people last night, if elected, will get to vote on hundreds of issues over their time in office. They are promising you that they will vote on principles when they get there. You do the same. The way I see it, if they get to vote 100 times in Congress, and you only get to vote for them once, you have to make a decision that is 100 times more principled than theirs’. If everyone does the same, we might actually be able to vote a better class of people into Washington and have a better, freer future of us and our children. As for the Republican Party, I wished they learned from their mistakes from the past instead of repeating it like they did last night.

Did you know that the UN has a plan for running the world and it is right out in the open?  It is called “sustainable development”, but it is far more comprehensive than it sounds.  The truth is that the UN plan for running the world would dramatically alter nearly all forms of human activity.  A 204 page report on “sustainable development” entitled “Working Towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy, A United Nations System-Wide Perspective” has been published in advance of the upcoming Rio + 20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro.  You can read the full reportright here.  It envisions a vast system of global carbon taxes, massive global safety nets and the implementation of a one world green economy.  Many of those that are pushing “sustainable development” on a global level believe that they are doing it for the good of the planet.  In fact, the 204 page report mentioned above even says that the transition “to a green economy requires a fundamental shift in the way we think and act” but that it will be worth it in the end.  What people need to understand is that throughout modern history tyranny has almost always been initially introduced by people that believed that they had “good intentions”.  No matter how much friendly language the UN uses in their reports, the truth is that what they are promoting is an insidious agenda of absolute tyranny on a global scale.

The upcoming Rio + 20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro comes 20 years after the original 1992 UN Earth Summit that adopted “Agenda 21“.  This new summit will be about renewing that commitment to “sustainable development” and moving that agenda forward.

A lot of people out there will not be alarmed by any of this because they know that the UN does not have the power to impose any of their goals on them right now.  But that is not the game that the UN is playing.

The UN is not playing a short-term political game.  The UN is ready to play their game for decades if necessary.  They will just keep coming back with conference after conference and treaty after treaty until they get what they want.

At the moment, the United Nations is operating as something of a “soft global government”.  The UN does not have the power to coerce nations to do their bidding yet, so they rely mostly on cooperation.  The UN will “take what they can get” right now, and they know that someday they will eventually have the power to turn their recommendations into mandates.

One of the things that the UN would love to implement is a global carbon tax scheme.  The power to tax is the power to control, and if the UN is ever given the power to tax the entire globe they will at that point become much more than a “soft global government”.

Right now, the UN is proposing a global carbon tax scheme that would come to as much as 0.6 percent of GDP for participating nations.  The following comes directly from the report….

CONTINUED at the American Dream.

Legislation would empower IRS to revoke passports of accused tax delinquents.

A Big Brother transport bill that will empower the IRS to revoke passports of alleged tax delinquents, mandate the installation of black boxes in all cars, as well as a myriad of other privacy-busting measures, is set to take a huge leap forward this week.

House Republicans are taking heat from Democrats over their passage of a bill that merely extends funding for already existing federal highway programs. Dems such as Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) have been vocal in pushing the House to pass their version of Senate Bill 1813, otherwise known as the ‘Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act’ (MAP-21).

However, MAP-21 represents a complete federal power grab over transportation and includes a number of chilling provisions that threaten to trample constitutional rights across the board.

The one that’s garnered most attention in the press is a provision that empowers the IRS to revoke passports of tax delinquents merely accused of owing over $50,000 in back taxes.

Labeled by prominent newspapers such as the Investor’s Business Daily as a “Stalinist” assault on mobility rights reminiscent of the Soviet Union, the provision is clearly unconstitutional, violating Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 , which forbids “Bills of Attainder,” and has also been shot down in several Supreme Court cases.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

CarbonSat: Enforcing green fascism’s CO2 tax from space.

The European Space Agency is set to green light a new surveillance satellite that will measure man-made carbon emissions from space in order to “hunt down” violators of international climate agreements, allowing Big Brother to enforce a future tax on CO2 emissions.

Labeled CarbonSat, the satellite system will have the ability to differentiate between natural carbon emissions and man-made CO2 releases. Earlier this month, the ESA announced that it had contracted space company Astrium to develop the satellite, which will be ready for deployment by 2017.

The Astrium press releaseannouncing the project makes no mention of the fact that the satellite will be used to perform surveillance on individuals and businesses to keep tabs on their carbon footprint, instead presenting its role as merely measuring carbon emissions.

However, an interview with Astrium President Evert Dudok carried by a German climate alarmist website makes it clear that the technology will be used to spy on human activity from space and impose penalties for non-compliance with United Nations environmental treaties and regulations.

According to a translation by the prominent climate skeptic website No Tricks Zone, Dudok reveals that the primary function of the satellite will be to perform highly intrusive surveillance.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

An Exclusive interview, Alex Jones speaks with Sen. Rand Paul on NDAA, TSA undercover on Houston busses, Obama’s overall neglect of the Constitution, his possible impeachment and much more. This is a must see video.

A year ago, in Action Comics, Superman declared plans to renounce his U.S. citizenship.

“‘Truth, justice, and the American way’ – it’s not enough anymore,” the comic book superhero said, after both the Iranian and American governments criticized him for joining a peaceful anti-government protest in Tehran.

Last year, almost 1,800 people followed Superman’s lead, renouncing their U.S. citizenship or handing in their Green Cards. That’s a record number since the Internal Revenue Service began publishing a list of those who renounced in 1998. It’s also almost eight times more than the number of citizens who renounced in 2008, and more than the total for 2007, 2008 and 2009 combined.

But not everyone’s motivations are as lofty as Superman’s. Many say they parted ways with America for tax reasons.

The United States is one of the only countries to tax its citizens on income earned while they’re living abroad. And just as Americans stateside must file tax returns each April – this year, the deadline is Tuesday – an estimated 6.3 million U.S. citizens living abroad brace for what they describe as an even tougher process of reporting their income and foreign accounts to the IRS. For them, the deadline is June.

The National Taxpayer Advocate’s Office, part of the IRS, released a report in December that details the difficulties of filing taxes from overseas. It cites heavy paperwork, a lack of online filing options and a dearth of local and foreign-language resources.

For those wishing to legally escape the filing requirements, the only way is to formally renounce their U.S. citizenship. Last year, IRS records show that at least 1,788 people did, and that’s likely an underestimate. The IRS publishes in the Federal Register the names of those who give up their citizenship, and some who renounced say they haven’t seen their name on the list yet.

The State Department said records it keeps differ from those published by the IRS. They indicate that renunciations have remained steady, at about 1,100 each year, said an official.

CONTINUED at Reuters.