Is Texas doing it right again?
would be placed on wire transactions going out of the country
if the sender could not prove they are a legal U.S. resident.
The money made from the fees would go to funding additional law
enforcement. And in Arizona, a similar measure would require an
individual to declare legal U.S. status in addition to proving
they had paid their taxes in order to send a wire transfer out
of the country.
What do you think about this.?
Good or bad ?
Answer:
I think its a great idea in principal. As long as the money gained from those transactions get earmarked for specific programs and just don't get thrown into the government spending slush fund!
The problem will always be that people will find a way to get around it though. Like by getting people who are citizens to wire it for them and take a fee off the top less than the government cut. I applaud them for trying though.
I think that it should be 20%.....
they tax the hell out of us and then want to only make them pay 10% on money that isn't taxed to begin with?
Hmmm, not a bad idea. It's a start.
But wish everyone would also go after the BUSINESSES hiring these people!
That's the source of the problem.
I'm not trying to insult illegals by using this analogy, but a policy that does not address the SOURCE of the problem - the employers - is like a policy of arresting prostitutes but not the "johns."
Cut off demand, and the supply will dry up!
Good.
Good. And they should jack it up to 25% if they can´t prove legal residency. There should also be a few ICE agents standing by to arrest them when they leave Western Union.
yes they have it right and use this money for the mezo american wall across texas arizona new mexico and california..the mezo american walls and the freedom ditch will keep us safe on our southern border.
Not only that but in addition everyone should boycott Bank of America for their "Safe Send to Mexico" program
http://www.bankofamerica.com/safesend/in...
In California the escrow company isn't allowed to release the full purchase price of your house to you if you are not a California resident. It caught me when I moved to the mid-west for a while. They want their taxes, and you have to give assurances to get your full price until taxes are paid.
I don't see why it shouldn't apply the same way to wages, where taxes are due, as well.
very good
It cannot be black or white, but in a shade of gray. The decision makes a lot of sense; yet,
Does that apply to expats from other countries?
How would that work in NYC?
How would that hurt US business worldwide, if other nations retaliated against such -yet another- protectionist measure?
Would that be applicable to only money wired by a natural person alone? If so, could Pizza Patrón bypass this law, being it a legal entity?
How would it hurt US citizens, since companies like Western Union would have to divert the losses to profiting from other businesses they run?
There's a saying in Mexico that goes "You may not cover the sun with a single finger".
Greetings.
The immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness