[HN Gopher] Costa Rica signs law to attract digital nomads
___________________________________________________________________
Costa Rica signs law to attract digital nomads
Author : tomduncalf
Score : 301 points
Date : 2021-08-14 08:20 UTC (14 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ticotimes.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (ticotimes.net)
| jobigoud wrote:
| There doesn't seem to be an age limit on this which is
| interesting. Someone posted a worker visa website the other day
| and some of them had age limits like applicant has to be < 35 yo.
| standardUser wrote:
| What I find more interesting is the idea that there would ever
| be an age limit for a visa (other than children). What could
| possible be the incentive to exclude people in their 40's and
| 50's, who likely have more money to spend then someone in their
| 20's?
| xwolfi wrote:
| Money to spend, they care less than having young, cheap-
| enough, able to make children, might go back home easily in
| case of trouble immigrants.
|
| I immigrated in my current country at 26 and it was really
| easy and warm, and they did everything to quadruple my salary
| from the european country I came from.
|
| Now that I'm close to permanent residency and 33, I'm
| thinking of jumping again, but with a kid, an giganormous
| salary and a lot of money to be picky, I expect to be more a
| burden for the next country than an obvious cheap asset.
| sologoub wrote:
| For regular work visas, the idea is to attract labor force
| that will be able to work a full career. In many places
| retirement terms are fairly generous and I'm guessing a lower
| level foreign employee who only worked the minimum years
| could be a net negative to the system.
| vmception wrote:
| They can do proof of stake, where some kind of wealth is
| directly or indirectly demonstrated.
|
| For example, the Cayman Islands had a pandemic program that
| required staying at certain bubble properties, which were
| like $10,000 per interval. Not sure what the interval was,
| but it was expensive and would accomplish the gatekeeping.
| fallenatreus wrote:
| care to share it, I would love to look at that site?
| jobigoud wrote:
| It was https://nomadvisa.io/
| xiphias2 wrote:
| This looks to me like the first step to generally get rid of
| income taxes (taxing people for working instead of for using the
| resources of the country).
| cblconfederate wrote:
| The shipping industry has been exempt from taxes for a long
| time now. Online businesses for long time were escaping the
| system. Now it seems things are going to move to more indirect
| taxation becaus taxing things in an interconnected world based
| on location is going to become increasingly impossible
| deanclatworthy wrote:
| Just because you're a digital nomad doesn't mean you're not
| using resources. You'll still need healthcare, repairs to the
| road you probably drive on, someone to take your trash etc.
| el-salvador wrote:
| Medical insurance from the Costa Rican Social Security will
| be required, so you'll have to pay for it. Roads are paid by
| tolls or tax at the gas pump. I think trash collection is
| paid by municipal taxes of the property you live in.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| This is what VAT and property taxes are for. When I went to
| Costa Rica to a hotel, I payed quite high taxes there. Also
| there's VAT on every other service that I took (like taxi and
| Uber, though taxis hate Uber in Costa Rica and go to great
| lengths to tell you that it's illegal).
|
| At the same time as I'm travelling, I'm still paying capital
| gain taxes to the country where I live officially, even
| though I get nothing in return from that country.
| namdnay wrote:
| The problem is that VAT is strongly regressive. If you
| wanted to remove income tax, you'd have to increase VAT but
| also give negative income tax (ie handouts) to everyone in
| the bottom 2-3 deciles
| deanclatworthy wrote:
| This concept is alien to me. Finland has income tax that
| everyone pays and it covers everything. There is still VAT
| when I buy an apple at the store, but it's not there to pay
| for the road repairs for the car I drive. We have seperate
| car tax.
|
| If you gain residency here, you are treated no different to
| a Finn.
|
| > At the same time as I'm travelling, I'm still paying
| capital gain taxes to the country where I live officially,
| even though I get nothing in return from that country.
|
| This is ludicrous and a fault of your own gov. I presume
| you are US.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| Not really, I spent a month in Portugal, a few in Brazil,
| few weeks in Panama, 1 month in Costa Rica, 1 month in
| Mexico (which was my favourite mix of US level hotels
| with the friendliness of latin american people). I'm
| European, and I was half year in my home country.
| Splitting income tax / capital gains between countries
| would be an option, but not really practical, as I could
| select when I'm selling my assets.
| Aerroon wrote:
| https://vm.fi/en/the-budget
|
| According to this, Finland's budget revenue for 2021 is
| estimated at EUR68.1 billion. EUR14 billion of it (20%)
| came from income and wealth taxes.
|
| Your excise taxes alone are almost half of what income
| and wealth taxes bring in. VAT is 31% of the budget
| revenue.
|
| With numbers like these I don't think it's unreasonable
| to do away with income taxes and replace them with other
| forms of taxation.
| deanclatworthy wrote:
| Thank you for the explanation. This is new to me :)
| namdnay wrote:
| Keep in mind that these 20% aren't spread across the
| whole population, contrary to VAT for example
|
| If you did away with income tax you'd still end up having
| to modulate another tax according to income/wealth, which
| kind of ends up being the same thing as an income tax
| [deleted]
| GlennS wrote:
| I think this is the wrong way to look at it.
|
| You're looking at it from an individual/market economy point of
| view as a transaction (tax for services).
|
| But that's not how the people setting the tax are looking at
| it. They're thinking about how can we make this country
| survive, how do we make it prosper, how much money do we need
| to make that happen, and how do we get that money from the
| population.
|
| So you should expect to pay for things which are:
|
| * Larger than individual or company scale
|
| * Longer than individual or company lifespan
|
| * Less probable than individuals or companies will consider
|
| * Strategic in some other way that the market economy isn't
| able to handle
|
| And yeah, a lot of those aren't going to benefit you
| personally. It's still a good idea for someone to be paying.
|
| The above is an idealisation, and of course there is also waste
| and corruption to add to the picture, which is probably what
| you really object to I imagine.
| studentrob wrote:
| Be aware drug trafficking is part of the culture there.
| reillyse wrote:
| what are you on about?
| kragen wrote:
| This law as described would exclude most of the digital nomads
| I've met, because it requires "Proof of a stable monthly salary,
| fixed income or a average monthly income, during the last year."
| Most digital nomads I've met do contract work rather than working
| for a fixed salary. Most of the people I know who work for a
| fixed salary, even on programming and sysadmin jobs where they
| can WfH frequently, aren't free to just move to wherever they
| want to move to; they have to be able to go to the office at
| least a few times a month. Or did before the pandemic, anyway;
| maybe that will change.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| > or a average monthly income, during the last year
| bane wrote:
| I'm sure others who've spent more time in Costa Rica can provide
| more color, but I found it a very interesting place. There's
| generally an "enlightened" government in place with relatively
| low corruption.
|
| The government has prioritized important things like clean
| drinking water, food safety standards, power, and internet
| (sometimes at the tradeoff of roads). There's a national emphasis
| on preserving the natural ecology of the country, and there's no
| military. The budget for which goes into social programs,
| education, and health care.
|
| You can go from the Caribbean to the Pacific Ocean in a few
| hours, which is great. But be warned the coastal areas are both
| incredibly hot _and_ humid. Fortunately, much of the country is
| at altitude and not nearly as hot thanks to numerous volcanoes
| which _also_ feature a hot springs culture in certain areas.
| Because of the rain forests there 's an impossible number of
| flora and fauna (and of course rain). All of this combines to
| make the country quite beautiful with some of the freshest
| tropical fruits you'll ever eat.
|
| The population is generally well educated, Intel used to have a
| chip fab there for a time and HP, Dell, Bayer, Bosch, IBM and
| more operate there. It's a heavily services oriented economy.
| Housing is affordable and the people are generally friendly
| enough. Food can be relatively basic, but is very filling and
| generally cheap.
|
| It's also fair to point out the downsides. Transportation around
| can be...rugged and the cities can be bogged down with traffic.
| The Capital city, San Jose...I didn't care much for...at least
| near the city center. It's also a very small country with a very
| small population (~4 million). This can be constraining for some
| outsiders.
|
| Overall though, I found it a fascinating and beautiful country
| and really did enjoy my time there. I would definitely go back
| given the chance. I also had a friend who lived there for several
| years and ran an consulting business to companies in the U.S. The
| timezone turned out to be rather advantageous and he was able to
| easy support U.S. East and West coast companies.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Rica
| gotrythis wrote:
| My partner and I were there last March, considering it as a
| place to move, and had to cut our trip short because of Covid.
| Some of the recent changes make it more viable, as importing
| cars etc, was very expensive.
|
| Regarding the government, a lot of locals were upset with the
| government policies, mostly around immigration, with lots of
| people moving into "slums" as low-wage workers from
| neighbouring countries, displacing Tico workers. There were a
| lot of fans of Trump there because of his policies around
| immigration. I was surprised, as I had a good impression of the
| government there, like you do, and expected to see more pride
| in the way things were done regarding the environment.
|
| Interestingly, one of the people I talked with these opinions
| was a full-time accountant who took the day off to drive us
| across the country for $100.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| What's the safety situation like?
| xmichael99 wrote:
| Excellent, one of the safer countries in the world.
| AdrianB1 wrote:
| In 2013 kidnaping and robberies were quite common; a
| colleague escaped a kidnaping attempt after a car chase with
| AK47 fire, some colleagues were extracted covertly from the
| country when they were incidental witnesses to a gang
| shooting in the restaurant they were having dinner, I saw in
| the shopping mall all security guards carrying big, bad
| shotguns on they back - this is the only country where I saw
| that, even Israel has less obvious security in place.
|
| No idea how is it today, it may be a lot better.
| reillyse wrote:
| this doesn't stack with my experience of the country at
| all. Sure Guatemala or El Sal but costa rica is super safe.
| xmichael99 wrote:
| You are so full of shit it's not even funny... whats your
| motivation for making up such crap?
| el-salvador wrote:
| This sounds more like El Salvador, Honduras or Guatemala
| than Costa Rica.
| AdrianB1 wrote:
| The place was San Jose, Costa Rica; the mall is
| Multiplaza Escazu.
| silverpepsi wrote:
| Worth mentioning San Jose is reputed as the one dodgy
| place of 0 interest you should avoid. I was told exactly
| this by an expat who has been there 20 years and have
| heard similar elsewhere.
| pibechorro wrote:
| I was there like 10 years ago, traveled across a lot of the
| country via public buses. It was one of the safest countries
| I visited.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| You're twice as likely to be murdered in parts of the San
| Francisco BA.
|
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/984826/homicide-rate-
| cos...
|
| https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/Homicides-are-
| up-3...
| matttrotter wrote:
| > I also had a friend who lived there for several years and ran
| an consulting business to companies in the U.S.
|
| Smart! Low taxes, same time zone, up and coming country...
| qorrect wrote:
| Pura Vida!
|
| Just kidding, I really did not like Costa Rica. The exchange rate
| ( The colon is worth more than the dollar, really ??? ), the
| people were rude, power goes out a lot and internet was spotty at
| best ( on the Atlantic side ).
| xmichael99 wrote:
| Atlantic side tends to suck, try going back and explore the
| Pacific!
| jlmorton wrote:
| > the colon is worth more than the dollar, really ???
|
| I'm a little confused by this. The exchange value for 1 USD to
| 1 Costa Rican Colon is 1:621. But I'm even more confused why
| this is a problem for you. It's the purchasing power that is
| important, and Costa Rica is significantly less expensive that
| the United States for someone holding US Dollars.
|
| > the people were rude
|
| All 4 million of them? If you've written off an entire country
| as rude, it might be on you.
| gotrythis wrote:
| When we were there last year, a lot of restaurants were way
| more expensive to eat in than restaurants in Canada, and the
| conversion rate was 2 to 1 everywhere, so if you carried U.S.
| money, you lost more than the actual exchange rate.
| jlmorton wrote:
| That's because the base unit is essentially 1,000 colones,
| and if you're transacting in US dollars, most people will
| give you 1000 colones to 2 US dollars (500:1).
|
| If you change your money, then you'll obviously get a
| better rate.
|
| When I said "holding US dollars," I didn't mean literally
| holding US dollars. I meant Costa Rica is generally cheaper
| than the United States for people whose primary income, or
| wealth is in US dollars.
| gotrythis wrote:
| Right, what he said.
| charlieflowers wrote:
| > If you've written off an entire country as rude, it might
| be on you.
|
| To quote thomas jefferson out of context, "uhhh, France?"
|
| Kidding, but more substantially... you're being a bit
| pedantic to the poster. When talking about places to possibly
| live for a while, anecdotes are helpful. And saying, "There
| people were rude" is a perfectly legit anecdote that clearly
| isn't meant to imply the entire population was assessed.
| miohtama wrote:
| How is Internet in Costa Rica?
| gotrythis wrote:
| Depends where you are. We were on the Caribbean side and in
| Lake Areal - loved it there. Internet was often useless in both
| places.
| xmichael99 wrote:
| Excellent, I have 300 MBPS/20 MBPS fiber at my house near the
| capital San Jose, and at our beach place (Jaco Beach) I have
| cable internet which is 200 MBPS/10 MBPS. Both cost about $90 a
| month cabletica.com tigo.cr kolbi.cr are the three main ones
| but there are tons of options and starlink will be available in
| early 2022.
| nottorp wrote:
| Excelllent compared to what... ? Your upload speeds at least
| seem laughable from Eastern Europe. Download is also quite
| low. I have 500 mbps just because i don't see a reason for 1
| Gbps.
| emmelaich wrote:
| Patchy outside the main cities, but I'm sure it will improve.
|
| Also .. Starlink.
| smallerfish wrote:
| That's out of date. They ran fiber down the Pacific coast
| when the highway was paved, and it doesn't cost that much to
| get a connecting line run to your house (source, did this a
| few months ago, have reliable symmetric 75Mb).
|
| Power is a larger concern - in rainy season we've been having
| outages several times a week, though most are short. That
| will vary based on location.
|
| In any case, if renting a house, check for fiber & check
| whether they have a generator or a few UPSes at least.
| desdiv wrote:
| Suppose you have a reliable generator system and your own
| house's power has reliable uptime. Would the internet still
| function during power outages? (The upstream telco
| equipment might lose power during an extended outage.)
|
| Another HNer mentioned Costa Rica's internet connections
| during power outages, hence my question:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28169281
| smallerfish wrote:
| I guess it depends on where you are and how wide the
| outage is. Most of our power outages are extremely local
| (we're in the middle of the jungle and trees come down
| during heavy rain), and usually resolved within a couple
| of hours. So far our internet has been consistently up,
| as long as we've been able to keep power on at the
| network cabinet and router.
|
| There's also good LTE (as a fallback) in many villages
| that cater to tourists, but coverage is spotty as you get
| more remote.
| lostmsu wrote:
| How hard would it be to get 1GBs symmetric?
| miohtama wrote:
| You will be limited by backbone and inter-country
| connections. Having 1 GBit to Costa Rica servers won't be
| that useful.
| xmichael99 wrote:
| That would be several thousand bucks a month, but there
| are numerous companies in the city that would run the
| fiber to your house. I had 50/50 and was paying $300 with
| a company called fibernet, but I dropped that in favor of
| a 300/20 + a 100/10 backup/load balanced at my house in
| the city.
| smallerfish wrote:
| IIRC it should be doable, though it would be expensive. I
| believe the line that I paid for (which I get to resell
| infrastructure costs to any neighbors who want to join
| after the fact) has a capacity over 1Gb.
| cinquemb wrote:
| Interestingly enough, also has no covid restrictions [NO test, NO
| quarantine, NO vaccine]:
| https://www.travelinglifestyle.net/countries-without-covid-t...
|
| Would be great to see more remote friendly + no covid restriction
| places esp as other countries double down.
| admissionsguy wrote:
| They still do masks everywhere, I think, so I will pass for
| now.
| pavlov wrote:
| Genuinely curious why you think this no-test-no-vaccine regime
| is a good thing for remote workers.
|
| I'd feel much safer living in a country whose healthcare system
| isn't constantly at risk of being overwhelmed by uncontrolled
| Covid spread.
| cinquemb wrote:
| It's just my preference to not want to live in fear (i've
| long left the US) and have more freedom in practice (due to
| lack of ability for government to enforce or government
| practices). There are plenty of other countries that are
| increasingly catering to the opposite for those who want to
| feel safe over everything, plus will make it easy to meet up
| with friends from other places in the world who are also
| working remotely.
|
| I live in a country with less than 10% vaccination rate now,
| and there is plenty of hospital capacity to cater to non-
| covid related things, esp for ones that see more expats than
| not.
| neither_color wrote:
| I can confirm that latin america is pretty chill right now
| but I'd be more tactful about how you frame it. So many
| people have had no choice but to comply with some pretty
| harsh restrictions that even if deep down they want to
| agree with you they'll lash out and accuse you of being
| reckless and getting people killed, blaming you for their
| restrictions continuing, etc. This applies not just to your
| old compatriots scared to travel but the people in the
| countries youre visiting. Colombia, from your list, for
| example may be open now but a few months ago the cops were
| beating people for going out. Not "please sir go back
| inside" but literal beat downs. When locals explained it me
| all I could say was "yeah it was rough for us too(even
| though not really Im from a laid back state in the US)"
| cinquemb wrote:
| > but I'd be more tactful about how you frame it.
|
| Fair enough, but thats never really how i've been, and
| old habits die hard.
|
| > So many people have had no choice but to comply with
| some pretty harsh restrictions
|
| True, but the writing has been on the wall for a while in
| certain jurisdictions that could even enable governments
| to do such things. I have a lot of sympathy for those who
| wanted out but couldn't for whatever reason (this goes
| beyond covid).
|
| > Colombia, from your list, for example may be open now
| but a few months ago the cops were beating people for
| going out. Not "please sir go back inside" but literal
| beat downs
|
| Yeah, cops like to beat down folks for various reasons
| everyday throughout the world (some places more than
| others), with or without covid restrictions, and that
| sucks in general.
| standardUser wrote:
| I'm not sure why you would live in fear, regardless of
| location. Sounds like an unpleasant way to live. But we
| should all live smartly enough to avoid overwhelming
| healthcare systems with COVID cases, which is a pretty easy
| thing to do at this point and requires no fear whatsoever.
| benjaminwootton wrote:
| I'll give you some support as I've also spent most of the
| last 18 months in countries with a more measured response
| to the virus. It's difficult for me to go and do the nomad
| thing, but escaping the madness for a year or two would be
| my main motivation.
| cinquemb wrote:
| That's completely fair, all I'm saying is that i'm for
| people to have the choice and options to do so if they
| can and want to and live where they want to live. If
| people want to take more risk along one dimension
| compared to other things they care about, good! If they
| want to take less risk along another dimension for things
| they care about, that's good too!
|
| More governmental jurisdictions offering a variety of
| ways people can try to live the way they want to live is
| better than less, imo.
| yosito wrote:
| I also prefer not to live in fear, which is why I wear a
| seatbelt in a car, a harness and a rope while climbing, and
| get a vaccine when there is a pandemic. Not living in fear
| doesn't have to mean pretending that life has no risks.
| It's about being aware of what the risks are and taking
| appropriate measures to protect yourself.
| cinquemb wrote:
| > Not living in fear doesn't have to mean pretending that
| life has no risks.
|
| Ha, I faced more risks growing up when I had to avoid the
| local gangs walking to school as a kid than I do now.
| Most people never gave a shit about that (and still
| don't), esp those that didn't live there. I won't really
| pretend that people really care about my safety or the
| safety of others any more so than their personal
| preferences.
| drooby wrote:
| Sounds like you'd be great at Russian Roulette
| cinquemb wrote:
| Yeah, a full clip pointed to your head? Though, I guess
| thats not much of Russian Roulette anymore :P
| syops wrote:
| I don't understand your response. Getting vaccinated for
| Covid has orders of magnitude less risk than not getting
| vaccinated. Desiring to live where there are no
| vaccination requirements has nothing to do with wanting
| to be free. That you've lived through more risky
| situations than Covid has nothing to do with these facts.
| incrudible wrote:
| > Getting vaccinated for Covid has orders of magnitude
| less risk than not getting vaccinated.
|
| I'm gonna have to fact-check that. In the UK, for under
| 50s with a delta infection, there is basically no risk
| reduction for death. For over 50s, the risk reduction is
| currently about 75%[1]. You would then have to scale that
| by the risk of getting infected, which would be a
| reduction of up to 90%, depending on when you got your
| vaccination and how well your immune system picked up on
| it. You _might_ hit a single order of magnitude.
|
| [1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/u
| ploads/...
| yosito wrote:
| > In the UK, for under 50s with a delta infection, there
| is basically no risk reduction for death
|
| I am really not sure how you reached this conclusion from
| the 44 page paper you linked. That paper explicitly says
| that being vaccinated reduces risk of becoming infected,
| and only mentions that Ct values (detectable virus) are
| similar in infected people whether they are vaccinated or
| not, but similar Ct values does not imply similar disease
| trajectories or outcomes.
| incrudible wrote:
| > I am really not sure how you reached this conclusion
| from the 44 page paper you linked.
|
| The data is on page 18/19. In the vaccinated group 13 out
| of 25,536 infections resulted in death (0.051%). In the
| unvaccinated group, it's 48 out of 147,612 (0.032%).
|
| > That paper explicitly says that being vaccinated
| reduces risk of becoming infected.
|
| Perhaps, but then even if you are infected, your risk of
| death (under 50) is still effectively the same. It's also
| not clear how big that risk reduction of infection is. It
| started out at 95% during the trials, Israel last
| reported 39%:
|
| https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-
| covid-v...
|
| > similar Ct values does not imply similar disease
| trajectories or outcomes
|
| We still use Ct values as a proxy for infectiousness.
| yosito wrote:
| > when I had to avoid the local gangs walking to school
|
| Following your logic, its a great thing that local
| authorities didn't do anything stop the local gangs, nor
| encourage taking any safety measures to protect yourself.
| Yay freedom?
| cinquemb wrote:
| > Following your logic, its a great thing that local
| authorities didn't do anything stop the local gangs, nor
| encourage taking any safety measures to protect yourself.
|
| They did, always another task force this that or another
| (I was only aware of some of this growing up), but never
| really changed the realities on the ground that some were
| exposed to more than others. Just learned to grow up and
| not expect that much and try to work with the people
| around me and watch each other, which wouldn't be
| possible if we were just trying to coerce one another to
| do things we didn't want to do (and was already kind of
| hard because I couldn't necessarily trust some around
| me).
|
| By all means, live where you want to live and shoot your
| self up with the latest drug someone is pushing (whether
| that is some kid selling "water" on the corner or Pfizer
| incentivized doctors in a pop up tent) to your ability to
| do so.
| ipaddr wrote:
| He is saying you only care about your pet issue. Real
| issues affecting his life you will never consider because
| it's not part of your worldview.
|
| Based on your response it seems true. You don't care to
| respond about issues posing more danger than your pet
| issue
| yosito wrote:
| This is only great if you believe that covid is fake and/or
| have no concern for the health of the people who live in the
| country.
| poorjohnmacafee wrote:
| Or, devil's advocate, if you believe it's a pretty low risk
| disease for most of the population, and that a novel mrna
| vaccine falls outside your risk tolerance. Or maybe you
| believe if you already have natural immunity from contracting
| covid you shouldn't need any restrictions at all. Or maybe
| you believe that mask mandates don't help much since the mask
| pores are 5k times larger than the size of this airborne (not
| aerosel) virus. Or maybe you understand that therapeutics
| exist, eg. how India is beating the virus with ivermectin
| which has been around forever and widely available.
|
| Or maybe you just think governments have overstepped and are
| on a slippery slope, as far as goes types of coercion
| methods, subtle or not, over your personal health choices.
|
| It's not black or white. There's a ton going on in this
| debate, and I think any healthy skeptic should continue to
| look at these things closely. I think there was just a
| Carnegie Melon study the other day saying that those with
| Phd's are unexpectedly vaccine hesitant vs. general pop. Just
| saying covid measures - vaccines - quarantines - there is a
| lot of room for debate right now.
| tzs wrote:
| > Or maybe you believe that mask mandates don't help much
| since the mask pores are 5k times larger than the size of
| this airborne (not aerosel) virus.
|
| The COVID virus is about 0.1 um.
|
| The pores in a 3-layer surgical mask are about 50 um to 500
| um in the first and third layer averaging around 100 um,
| and 12 um to 30 um in the middle layer averaging around 13
| um.
|
| For a 3-layer N95 mask, it is 50 um to 200 um first layer
| averaging about 75 um, 40 um to 120 um averaging 50 um for
| the third layer, and 10 um to 20 um averaging 11 um for the
| middle layer.
|
| If the only mechanism by which filtering of air worked was
| to catch particles that were too big to pass through the
| pores, then the virus would indeed go right through.
|
| However, that is _not_ the only mechanism. Here 's a short
| article from a filter company explaining the different
| mechanisms [1]. It is quite counterintuitive--as particle
| size goes down below the pore size efficiency starts to
| drop as you would intuitively expect but only for a bit and
| then as particle size continues to go down efficiency
| rises.
|
| [1] http://donaldsonaerospace-
| defense.com/library/files/document...
| imglorp wrote:
| No, the vaccine data are black and white. We're approaching
| 5 billion doses administered with minimal serious adverse
| effects. Compare the rates to MMR, DPT or anything else
| given in the billions to the world.
|
| Conversely, some 95% of covid deaths are unvaccinated. It
| works. Get it and help everyone around you.
|
| https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-
| glo...
|
| https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-
| product/modern...
| incrudible wrote:
| > No, the vaccine data are black and white.
|
| If you look at some real-world vaccine efficacy data, you
| will find that it is far from black and white. In the UK,
| with delta infections, there is no observable risk
| reduction against death for under 50s.
|
| https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploa
| ds/...
|
| > We're approaching 5 billion doses administered with
| minimal serious adverse effects.
|
| It doesn't matter if the side-effects are minimal, what
| matters is that the risk/reward benefit pays off. For
| instance, we still don't know the complete extent to
| which Pfizer vaccines cause heart issues. There are many
| cardiac events that aren't clearly linked to the vaccine,
| because they _could_ have occurred by chance. That doesn
| 't mean they aren't linked though.
|
| Here's some statistically significant numbers out of
| Israel, showing an increase in lethal cardiac events in
| certain population groups:
|
| https://twitter.com/RanIsraeli/status/1425002893116166144
|
| If we put this putative risk against the vanishingly
| small risk of a lethal covid infection in a young person
| with no risk factors, the vaccine doesn't necessarily
| come out on top.
|
| In the case of viral-vector vaccines, even the very rare
| (but often fatal) TTS alone suggests that such
| vaccination is not indicated for people under 60 in
| Australia:
|
| https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026441
| 0X2...
|
| > Conversely, some 95% of covid deaths are unvaccinated.
|
| This is a meaningless number. It depends on how many
| people are vaccinated and when you started counting. In
| the UK, roughly half of the recent COVID deaths are in
| the fully vaccinated, though they are also obviously
| older. In the under-50 group, there is no difference,
| like I said.
|
| > Get it and help everyone around you.
|
| This is another fallacy, because the vaccine prevents
| neither infection nor transmission reliably. If you have
| reason to believe the vaccine gives you a meaningful
| reduction in risk, get it to protect yourself. If you
| want to protect others, adjust your behavior. Get tested
| and avoid close interactions with lots of people. In
| either case, don't ask _me_ to take a risk for your or
| anyone else 's benefit.
| yosito wrote:
| > In the UK, with delta infections, there is no
| observable risk reduction against death for under 50s
|
| I am really not sure how you reached this conclusion from
| the 44 page paper you linked. That paper explicitly says
| that being vaccinated reduces risk of becoming infected,
| and only mentions that Ct values (detectable virus) are
| similar in infected people whether they are vaccinated or
| not, but similar Ct values does not imply similar disease
| trajectories or outcomes.
| incrudible wrote:
| > I am really not sure how you reached this conclusion
| from the 44 page paper you linked.
|
| The data is on page 18/19. In the vaccinated group 13 out
| of 25,536 infections resulted in death (0.051%). In the
| unvaccinated group, it's 48 out of 147,612 (0.032%).
|
| > That paper explicitly says that being vaccinated
| reduces risk of becoming infected.
|
| Perhaps, but then even if you are infected, your risk of
| death (under 50) is still effectively the same. It's also
| not clear how big that risk reduction of infection is. It
| started out at 95% during the trials, Israel last
| reported 39%:
|
| https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-
| covid-v...
|
| > similar Ct values does not imply similar disease
| trajectories or outcomes
|
| We still use Ct values as a proxy for infectiousness.
| vizzah wrote:
| Who and why downvotes this?
| sundarurfriend wrote:
| Meta comment: I upvoted this despite disagreeing with a lot
| of it, because it's an articulate and polite presentation
| of a view that many HN-ers apparently hold (going by other
| threads). I adhere to the old norms that downvotes are for
| non-contributing or impolite comments (like the "you stupid
| sheeple" form that many others have taken with this), not
| for disagreement.
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| Better to get the full mRNA load from being infected with
| Covid, right?
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| This is only true if you assume every Covid restriction is
| scientifically-based.
| yosito wrote:
| I don't have to assume that *every* restriction is
| scientifically based to know that *some* restrictions,
| quarantines and (virtually all) vaccines are important
| science-based tools for fighting a pandemic.
| gremloni wrote:
| No effort to fight a pandemic is categorically a bad thing.
| beckman466 wrote:
| > "Tourists who stay for longer periods of time redistribute
| their money in the value chains generated by tourism," Segura
| said.
|
| Well that's not true. All this will do is further commoditize the
| housing market and price locals out of the very neighborhoods
| they grew up in. Digital nomadism aims to turn the whole of the
| global south into a company town for the benefit of the owners of
| Intellectual Property in the global north (plus the politicians
| who helped create these horrific Intellectual Property systems
| and laws), as well as the privileged knowledge laborers who work
| for them.
|
| In other words; without access to the firewalled and 'IP
| protected' networks of scientific knowledge (the sum total of all
| human progress) the global south is perpetually blocked from
| growing, and has become a plaything of the global north elite, to
| be used and abused and plundered at will.
| yosito wrote:
| That's quite a narrative you're asserting. Curious what facts
| you have to support it.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Think of the big picture, more income in these locations means
| more local spending on infrastructure and schooling, it is a
| long process, but it is possible.
|
| Studies have found that income inequality decreases with
| improved worker mobility.
| mc32 wrote:
| These well-to-do nomads tend to live in well to do immigrant
| ghettoes. They don't compete with the housing stock locals use.
|
| In the north people always tout the benefits of having
| immigrants come in --especially the high income highly
| educated.
|
| But here you're doing the opposite and saying high income
| immigrants are bad for the locals. Is that the case only in one
| direction?
|
| If you want someone to blame for the poor economy, blame local
| politicians corruption and graft endemic locally.
|
| Compare Argentina to New Zealand. One has many more resources
| and many more people, both in the south but one has corruption
| and the other doesn't. One does well and the other perpetually
| defaulting and getting nowhere.
|
| Before you blame it on the past dictatorships keep in mind past
| dictatorships in s Korea, Taiwan, Japan even, have not kept
| those countries from becoming economic dynamoes. You do have to
| do the hard work of getting your house in order, instill
| education and entrepreneurship and a dream to succeed
| (corruption might favor incumbents for example).
| s0rce wrote:
| In bad housing markets like Toronto and Vancouver people
| don't tout the benefits of wealthy foreigners (immigrants or
| just investors) buy houses and making the area unaffordable
| to the locals.
| marcinzm wrote:
| International investment, including tourism, is in general the
| fastest way a country can improve it's standard of living. Of
| course, it's not guaranteed since corruption can easily eat
| away at the gains but baring that it works rather well. The
| alternative is a very slow and long grind to improve the
| economy while every other country is improving even faster
| since they have more money to throw at it.
|
| Here's the dark secret: these countries are already the
| playthings of other countries and effectively irrelevant and
| powerless. The question is how they stop being that and not
| they avoid becoming it.
| kragen wrote:
| I agree with your critique of the "intellectual property"
| system, and certainly it is true that it serves as a new form
| of colonialism, extracting rents without providing the supposed
| benefits for which it was established. And I don't know what
| the overall social effects of "digital nomadism" will be. But
| overall I think your comment lacks coherence.
|
| I think sci-hub is blocked in a bunch of European countries but
| very little of the so-called global south.
|
| I'm not sure you know what a company town is. In a company
| town, a single company owns the whole town, trapping the
| inhabitants in a cycle of buying overpriced goods at the
| company store and renting overpriced housing from the company,
| so they can never save money. Mr. Peabody and his privileged
| knowledge laborers didn't move to a company town or even a
| quasi-company-town like Pawnee; he moved to Hinsdale, a wooded
| suburb of Chicago, where he'd grown up.
|
| My experience with the so-called "global south" is that usually
| the local elites have a great deal more influence than overseas
| companies, and they use it to consolidate their own power,
| preventing economic development. But generalizations are
| misleading; the peripheral countries in the world economic
| system are extremely diverse. The problems in Nigeria are not
| the same as the problems in Argentina, which (fortunately) are
| not the same as the problems in Venezuela, and Micronesia has
| totally different problems (and _is_ largely controlled by
| overseas politicians).
| cblconfederate wrote:
| But that's already happening. In addition the global north
| currently brain drains the rest of the world who reared and
| educated their most precious workers. If anything this will
| allow them to go back, with all the positives that brings
| matttrotter wrote:
| Does anyone know if Colombia has this type of digital nomad visa?
| zebnyc wrote:
| To those of you look to take advantage of this, I would strongly
| recommend getting a high-rise / 4 wheeler. THey are probably
| twice as expensive as the low-ride sedans but you won't hate
| yourself while driving it. The infrastructure / roads were
| terrible especially around tourist destinations.
|
| Data point: Visited Costa rica around 2012
|
| As a side note, is there good schooling in Costa rica? Asking for
| a toddler. Cheers
| arrty88 wrote:
| Visiting this website made my iPhone get very hot.
| morpheos137 wrote:
| Something I have wondered about for a long time is how many
| "digital nomads" there really are in the world? Are we talking
| hundreds? Thousands? Tens of thousands?
|
| It seems to me that maybe the lifestyle is hyped online way
| beyond its actual likely prevalence.
|
| For taxonomic purposes I define a digital nomad as somebody who
| travels for an extended period of time and actively makes a
| living online while doing so. I would exclude independently
| wealthy people and tourists. There have always been rich
| travelers.
| yosito wrote:
| I've lived the lifestyle for 10 years. By my estimation, there
| are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. But it's
| not a strictly defined concept. Some people consider themselves
| nomads because they have virtually no home base anywhere in the
| world and home is where they stored their stuff this week.
| Others consider themselves nomads because they travel 2-3
| months a year. And there's a whole range in between.
| [deleted]
| jamal-kumar wrote:
| It only costs me like 150-200$ to fly from USA/Canada to
| Central America sometimes, and once you get there it's really
| cheap, so you'd be surprised! You do see people making proper
| bank out there living in stupid overpriced condos for sure, but
| I would fathom they're the minority. On the lower end of the
| income spectrum for digital nomads, you do see a lot of people
| who do stuff like corky little wordpress sites, copy writing,
| translation work or whatever on fiver.com making like what
| you'd make for that, who can't even write code and just
| outsource it to other people on fiver in India or whatever,
| living comfortably in cheap hostels and stuff on under
| 1000$/month. This is comparable to the middle class income in
| Costa Rica which is around 750$/mo. I don't even think people
| making this much money abroad are going to be paying taxes back
| home on what you would basically be making doing spongebob
| squarepant's job, which is interesting because as far as I know
| Costa Rica still doesn't even have an income tax despite
| measures to try and introduce them, which was met with
| widespread protest.
|
| Of note is that the people on this lower income tier of people
| who travel on a low budget while working are going to be on
| tourist visas. Costa Rica's tolerated this for many years now
| but I think they're pretty much officially encouraging more
| people in the higher income bracket to come through too.
| kragen wrote:
| > _There have always been rich travelers._
|
| It's surprising how untrue this is. Ibn Battuta and Marco Polo
| were really outstanding exceptions, but even they were within
| the past millennium; from the dawn of human history 2 million
| years ago until the advent of metal money around 3000 years
| ago, there was no way to _be_ a rich traveler, because wealth,
| to the extent that it could be accumulated at all, was not
| portable. It took the form of land and livestock. If you were a
| traveler at all, you lived by the hospitality of the people in
| the lands you visited, who could also kill you without fear of
| repercussions if they felt like it, and very likely would if
| they thought you were stealing their deer or their millet. You
| had no way to pay them; your granary deposit receipts from Ur
| were of no value in Egypt, and vice versa.
|
| So there have only been rich travelers for the latest 0.15% of
| human history. But if you are shortsighted enough I guess that
| might seem almost the same as "always".
|
| I'd put the number of digital nomads at probably tens of
| thousands. We founded coworking in part in order to make
| digital nomadism possible.
| drno123 wrote:
| We have a similar law in Croatia for a while; not sure how many
| digital nomads are currently working from Croatia.
|
| https://croatianomad.com/
| benjaminwootton wrote:
| I just returned from Dubrovnik and Hvar. Would be a great place
| to spend a year or two working remotely!
| lostmsu wrote:
| The link you posted does not explain the law. It is effectively
| an ad.
| chx wrote:
| We have been collecting digital nomad visas at
| https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/158462/4188 there are a lot
| post-covid.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Thank you so much for sharing this.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| The permission to be there is one thing, but the lack of
| taxation is what makes it really attractive. Do any of the
| others also offer that?
| bane wrote:
| Thailand is coming close to a digital nomad visa.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| I'm surprised that this excludes digital nomads from local income
| taxes. You'd think tax revenue would be a big incentive for them
| to attract people, and most countries have anti double taxation
| laws.
| smallerfish wrote:
| It's all about local jobs. The official unemployment rate is
| 20%, reality is likely significantly higher.
| nikanj wrote:
| The people will still bring in plenty of money into the local
| economy
| drclau wrote:
| This ^^^. It's essentially cash flow towards the country,
| part of which is spent locally. It's pretty much tourism on
| steroids.
|
| And, to make it work, they need to make it very attractive.
| silvestrov wrote:
| and it's tourism in the off-season.
| toastal wrote:
| I think it's more like a steady drip feed. I moved
| abroad, and I spend less than a tourist once I figured
| out how locals generally do it, but still considerably
| more than a local because I want to eat foods from other
| countries and get a nice coffee most days.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| And they can always tax again later.
| loceng wrote:
| And they have to compete with other countries.
| merrywhether wrote:
| It's possible that this means no employer taxes either, which
| shields the employing company from having to set up a local tax
| entity, which is otherwise a huge barrier for US FAANG-type
| employees as I understand it. I know that I can't work from any
| other countries currently, and I'm curious if these types of
| visas/arrangements would remove that barrier.
| tomatocracy wrote:
| The other two big barriers which can apply are company
| taxation (if I am a director/senior manager of a company is
| there a risk that the Company could become tax resident in
| Costa Rica?) and regulation (is there a risk that I am doing
| something illegal in Costa Rica because either I or the
| Company don't have any local regulatory permission?).
|
| (There is also a company tax issue which I don't think this
| type of thing can solve, which is the risk of the tax
| residency or tax status of the Company in its home
| jursidiction or third countries relying on directors/senior
| managers physically being located in the home jurisdiction).
| oflanac52 wrote:
| a new startup called "Remote", reached unicorn status, is
| solving this issue by having all these entities set up on
| behalf of their clients.
|
| If countries do stuff like this tho, it would actually
| undermine.
|
| really hope to see other countires follow suit.
| tomduncalf wrote:
| This would be interesting if it is the case - you remain a
| tax resident in and employed by a company in your home
| country, but you live elsewhere. No idea if such a thing is
| possible. International tax laws are beyond me!
| FBISurveillance wrote:
| > They will also be exempted from local income taxes, will be
| able to open local bank accounts and can drive in Costa Rica
| using their country's license, among other benefits.
|
| With this kind of visas I've always been curious: Unless you're
| US or Eritrea citizen, does this mean you don't have to pay any
| income tax at all, given you loose your home country's tax
| residentship in 183 days after leaving?
| codeddesign wrote:
| Those countries require taxation of citizens regardless of
| residency. Citizens elsewhere are taxed based upon residency
| (the last time I checked). Also - if you are a US citizen you
| get $120k tax free if out of the country for 11 months. $240k
| for married.
|
| * Costa Rica is pretty cheap. 30%-50% of US living cost. (minus
| Manhattan or west coast) You also get monkey's in your
| backyard!
| unstatusthequo wrote:
| U.S. citizens living abroad still have to pay Federal taxes to
| the U.S. government. That applies regardless of where the money
| is earned.
|
| You'd have to renounce citizenship to get out of that little
| gem.
| tremon wrote:
| It depends on the country and the nature of your income. If
| you're self-employed, generally yes. If you're a salaried
| employee, that part of your income is usually taxed in the
| country of employment* regardless of where you live. The
| situation also depends on whether your home country has a tax
| treaty with the country where you live.
|
| *insert 1001 loopholes and exceptions here.
| gnopgnip wrote:
| You wouldn't pay US tax on the first ~$100k of non US income.
| With remote work that distinction is important, for instance
| youtube payments from advertisers for US viewers are US income
| even if you make the videos outside of the US and are not a US
| resident or citizen starting this year.
|
| For the local taxes, there are a lot of other taxes besides
| income tax the local government benefits from
| jandrewrogers wrote:
| More precisely, the first ~$100k of _wage_ income. Many
| common types of income do not qualify for this exclusion.
| pzo wrote:
| I think worth to mention there is distinction between being
| resident and tax resident. I think matter is getting more
| complicated if someone working via limited company setup in
| different country instead of self-employed.
| AdrianB1 wrote:
| It depends; if you are an employee of a big company and you are
| working from home, but you covertly move to CR for a few
| months, you still have to pay taxes in your official country of
| residence. If you want to move the residence, your company may
| fire you (it just happened to a good friend that moved to a
| neighboring country in EU, not even outside EU or a different
| continent).
|
| But if you are self-employed or a different flexible
| arrangement, in some countries you can do the trick. For
| example if you live in Romania and move to CR for 2 years, you
| don't pay the 45% minimum income tax, which basically makes
| Costa Rica an "evil tax heaven" and you a very, very bad
| citizen of your country that is not contributing.
| Izikiel43 wrote:
| > 45% minimum income tax
|
| Holy shit
| grecy wrote:
| Many countries have cracked down on this in the last Decade.
|
| In Canada, you didn't have to pay income tax if you were
| outside the country for more than half the year.
|
| Now as a citizen or resident you have a bank account in Canada,
| any assets (house, car) or even set foot in the country within
| any given year you have to pay income taxes there.
| raverbashing wrote:
| On the opposite side, the IRS was, a couple of years ago
| getting interested on Canadians that were spending more than
| 183 days in the US running away from the winter
| pzo wrote:
| At least in Poland this is not so obvious since to be a tax
| resident _any_ of 2 things have to apply: 1) you stayed
| longer than 6 months there 2) Poland is the "center of your
| life"
|
| Generally the second one is quite abstract and is mostly
| tested in court and generally the less connection you have in
| Poland the more likely you are not considered as Poland being
| the center of your life such as: - not having company there -
| not having family (wife, kids) there - not having most
| investments there - not visiting regularly - not having any
| income from there
|
| however still you can e.g. have a bank account or own flat
| that you rent there and still not considered to be a tax
| resident, probably you would have to prove that there is
| other country that is center of your life (e.g. paying taxes
| there, staying more than 6 months, having wife/kids living
| there, etc.)
|
| What's gets very unclear what happens if someone doesn't have
| any "center of their life" anywhere - e.g. someone keep
| travelling for many years and every 2-3 months switching
| countries, living on the boat. After all e.g. 'donuts' don't
| have any center that belongs to them.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| It might be unclear what happens to you, but the ultra
| wealthy know exactly what happens when you don't have a
| clear center, hint: (extremely low to zero taxes! If you
| have the right lawyers...)
| ipaddr wrote:
| They default to the last residency location.
| ilammy wrote:
| > _What 's gets very unclear what happens if someone
| doesn't have any "center of their life" anywhere._
|
| Ukrainian tax code has similar provisions about "center of
| life interest" and "staying more than 183 days", and a
| backup clause stating that if your tax residency status
| cannot be clearly determined with the above approach then
| you are considered a resident if you are a citizen.
|
| I guess this covers the case where you claim that you don't
| have to pay taxes in Ukraine just because no other country
| has considered you a tax resident and you never paid any
| taxes _there_ , so you can't use that to argue that you're
| a non-resident as far as Ukraine in concerned.
| ipaddr wrote:
| It is a little bit more complex. If you don't change your
| residency you are still considered a resident and must pay
| taxes. If you live in a ship and sailed the world last year
| you still must pay taxes because you are considered a
| resident.
|
| If you have assets or a wife in Canada they may declare you a
| resident even after a year.
| grecy wrote:
| I'm a Canadian resident, who has spent over 5 years driving
| around the world, never staying in a single country more
| than a month or three. All those were just tourist visas,
| so it would have been illegal for me to live and work
| there.
|
| During all of that, I had to pay income tax in Canada, even
| though I went >2 years then almost 3 years without setting
| foot in the country.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| Yes. e.g. in places like Qatar that's 0% income tax, it means
| no taxes at all
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| > With this kind of visas I've always been curious: Unless
| you're US or Eritrea citizen, does this mean you don't have to
| pay any income tax at all, given you loose your home country's
| tax residentship in 183 days after leaving?
|
| If you really become fiscal resident of a country with 0%
| income tax and the country you left is fine with that then,
| yes, you pay 0% income tax. I've got a friend who really went
| to live with his family in Monaco (he was a native french
| speaker, but not from France, which helps): he's there since
| five years now I'd say and, indeed, he pays 0% income tax.
| ucha wrote:
| Tax residency is a very complicated matter but in general, you
| do not loose tax residency 183 days after leaving.
|
| In Spain, it takes 5 years before losing tax residency after
| you've left the country. In France, having your wife and
| children in France makes you resident even if you don't live
| there. In the UK, you can be resident by only spending 15 days
| in the country if some other conditions are met.
|
| On top of that you have to add the interaction between national
| law and double taxation agreements between countries.
| amelius wrote:
| Yeah, they designed tax law such that only big companies can
| evade it.
| tluyben2 wrote:
| > In Spain, it takes 5 years before losing tax residency
| after you've left the country.
|
| Do you have a reference? I have never heard about that (which
| can happen, spain has many rules) and I doubt anyone holds to
| those rules but it would be good to know. I had a business in
| spain and as a foreign tax resident I tried to do everything
| by the book; the locals laughed in my face for declaring
| taxes at all. The system is so complex and unfriendly (the
| fines are high and there is world wealth tax which has fines
| that are probably not even legal in the EU; there are legal
| cases going on about it) I doubt anyone can follow the exact
| rules, but I tried (and probably paid way too much because of
| it).
| ucha wrote:
| "Taxpayers liable to PIT:
|
| Individuals of Spanish nationality who accredit their new
| fiscal residence in a country or territory labelled as a
| tax haven will not lose their status as taxpayers for
| Individual Income Tax. This rule is of application during
| the tax period in which the change of residence occurs and
| for the next four tax periods."
|
| https://www.oecd.org/tax/automatic-exchange/crs-
| implementati...
| tluyben2 wrote:
| Ah ok, that is very particular: tax havens and Spanish
| nationality. But thanks, I did not know that. And luckily
| neither applies to me!
| ucha wrote:
| It's even more particular, but in practice, it does
| affect a lot of funds, if not a lot of people - which is
| why they legislated. One can move to a no/low tax
| jurisdiction and not be a Spanish tax resident as long as
| they're covered by a double taxation agreement.
| tomp wrote:
| Does this rule actually make sense? So instead of moving
| from Spain to e.g. Cayman Islands, you move from Spain to
| the UK, become UK taxpayer (in something like 180 days),
| cease being Spanish taxpayer, then move from the UK to
| Cayman Islands. Saves 4 years!
|
| This is just another example of braindead legislation
| created by people who are unable to consider the full
| spectrum of the consequences of the law (beyond just the
| "intended" effects) and/or their primary motivation is
| publicity ("look at all these _great_ laws I passed! ")
| tkiolp4 wrote:
| In your example, the moment you move from UK to Cayman
| Islands, the Spanish government/tax system will know
| (unless you make sure you hide it... but this is another
| topic). At some point you won't be a UK taxpayer, in that
| moment the Spanish government/tax system will categorize
| you as Spanish taxpayer. I mean, if you are a Spanish
| citizen and you try to pull this trick, it may work as
| long as you never try to transfer the money you saved in
| the Cayman Islands to any Spanish bank account (any
| normal bank account, actually).
| rjzzleep wrote:
| That doesn't sound right, but maybe there is something
| about the Spanish law I don't know. You can transition to
| other countries tax residency in Germany if you de-
| register(most countries don't have the concept of de-
| registering) and enter the other ones without making use
| of double taxation laws. You do have to notify your local
| tax authority of leaving though otherwise they'll happily
| continue treating you like a resident. Usually the
| overlap is something like a year. Most countries actually
| have insight into each others tax records nowadays.
| dnh44 wrote:
| I too thought of moving my business to Spain until I
| started speaking to friends and acquaintances that had
| businesses in Spain. Lots of horror stories.
| david-gpu wrote:
| Can you give us a brief idea of what they said?
| tluyben2 wrote:
| Not the parent but from my own experience having had
| companies in many countries: Spain was by far the hardest
| and most confusing. I only had companies (4) in
| Andalusia, so I cannot comment on other regions; where
| other countries are quite logical and I am usually able
| to reason with the tax auditors, in Spain it was hostile
| and most accountants, lawyers and gestors basically told
| us, time and time again, to just relax and do many
| illegal things as you will lose boatloads of money I'd
| you do not. However, I like sleeping at night as do my
| partners so with did everything by the book and it was
| extremely painful to do so. There are rules on rules on
| rules, deducting business costs are hard if not
| impossible etc. And you need help for everything: in
| Spain there is an industry called Gestors who are not
| accountants but people who help navigate the bureacracy.
| The Spanish use them as well and there are many all over
| the place. So you pretty quickly find out things work if
| you are a tiny company (autonomo) and just don't declare
| any tax (put it in your matress), hire people by paying
| them cash etc. Or you need to be a large corp with
| lawyers, accountants etc to navigate things efficiently.
| In between you mostly just get misery. I sold and closed
| the companies and the people that bought them since then
| burnt out and quit or just adopted what my Spanish
| friends call 'the Spanish way', which is, quite simply
| basically running almost fully illegally: having a
| 'broken' PoS all the time (so people have to pay cash),
| using black funds to pay people and goods and just
| showing losses all the time (paying only the autonomo
| social security and nothing more). I would find it
| impossible to sleep as I simply cannot accept the thought
| of the Guardia stomping down the door in a few years. My
| friends tell me I worry too much about nothing... maybe;
| I would never do it again.
|
| Good to know is that Spanish taxes can go back 4 tax
| years which equates to about 5 years. This is shorter
| than most countries I did business in.
| insta_anon wrote:
| I'd also be very interested in learning more.
| petre wrote:
| I keep seeing news titles about football playes like
| Cristiano Ronaldo and celebrities like Shakira getting
| slapped with back taxes and suspended jail sentences in
| Spain. A complex tax system and unclear rules are just
| another opportunity for abuse by tax authorities.
|
| https://m.timesofindia.com/sports/football/top-
| stories/messi...
| Y_Y wrote:
| It's worth noting that there is special provision for
| these kinds of cases:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckham_law
|
| Of course this doesn't protect you from outright tax
| evasion. Also there are some rules like the calculation
| of capital gains that differ from the US system, meaning
| that you are not necessarily protected from double
| taxation, since each system taxes a different
| transaction.
| tluyben2 wrote:
| The NHR in Portugal allows this for everyone (not wealthy
| per se).
| bwb wrote:
| Anyone moving to Portugal under NHR is by definition
| wealthy :)
| tluyben2 wrote:
| How so? It is attractive for more reasons than paying
| less tax for wealth. I know quite a lot of wfh devs who
| moved in the past year.
| bwb wrote:
| ya those people are all wealthy :)
| tluyben2 wrote:
| I guess our definition of wealthy is different. There are
| bucketloads of 'nomads' under the NHR that have no wealth
| and just get money from outside PT: I am talking a few
| 1000 per month. What is wealth for you? The Beckham law
| wealth is what I would call wealth and sure there are
| people using nhr to move their wealth from some fund to
| their person within the 10 years without paying tax.
| However, unlike the Beckham law, for the NHR you do not
| need capital to benefit.
| bwb wrote:
| I really doubt anyone is applying for NHR status with a
| few thousand a month, more than likely they would get
| denied for that. The rules have gotten a lot tighter over
| the last few years.
|
| I would way that anyone moving to Portugal to apply for
| NHR status and who is a programmer is wealthy. IE, anyone
| making over 80k to 100k on the low end.
| tluyben2 wrote:
| Ok, but you would be wrong. It is anyone who works in a
| profession PT wants to attract. And it got more strict
| but any IT job qualifies and it matters not what the
| salary is.
| thefounder wrote:
| The abuse is both ways...see how much tax Amazon and
| Apple is paying. Hint: not much!
| CodesInChaos wrote:
| They are paying VAT (revenue tax), but avoid corporate
| tax (profit tax).
| thefounder wrote:
| VAT is not the only tax to be paid in the EU. Not to
| mention they pay less VAT than the local businesses
| through various schemes(i.e registering the company that
| makes the sale in a country with lower VAT)
| CodesInChaos wrote:
| > i.e registering the company that makes the sale in a
| country with lower VAT
|
| Do they? The Amazon invoices I receive have German VAT.
| Y_Y wrote:
| At least in Spain a company will usually be able to avoid
| VAT on purchases they make. It is true that they charge
| and collect VAT on their sales to consumers. The majority
| off tax paid by these companies is on what they pay their
| employees.
| tluyben2 wrote:
| This is very hard in reality though especially on goods
| from abroad; your NIE has to be on the invoice officially
| (which companies like BA do not do for you and I flew
| with them a lot for business) and while this is not
| strictly enforced, I got slapped many times on valid
| business purchases. The gestor told me to just deduct 75%
| of the deductible vat to not get onto the radar. Ugh.
| Y_Y wrote:
| This is too real. The ultimate tax is on your time,
| especially as a foreigner.
| 988747 wrote:
| VAT is not a revenue tax. VAT is the tax paid by
| consumers not by the company. Company only acts as tax
| collector. The weird thing is this: they collect VAT on
| everyting they sell, but then, for everything they buy
| (raw materials, office supplies, etc.) they can substract
| amount of VAT paid for those from the amount of VAT
| collected. So purchases by companies are basically VAT-
| free. And of course some tax optimisation schemes come
| into play here, with some companies getting ahead on VAT
| (like, actually getting a VAT refund from the government,
| instead of paying it).
| notahacker wrote:
| What makes you think the tax authorities were the ones
| being abusive, and not the very expensive tax specialists
| hired on behalf of a class of people moaning that it's
| not fair that people earning EUR100m a year don't pay
| smaller proportions of their income in taxes than people
| earning EUR100k?
| notahacker wrote:
| All these downvotes, and not one person prepared to
| explain why portions of a Spain-based footballer's
| earnings from Spanish companies accruing to Belize based
| companies is the _tax authorities_ being abusive...
|
| Or why the tax authority would prefer a situation where
| the tax code is sufficiently complex the Messis and their
| financial advisers think such an evasion scheme is worth
| trying to one where they just receive a percentage of his
| very large earnings without any fuss or court case, like
| your average employee of a Spanish company. The reality
| is the reverse: people with a lot of income to disguise
| and creative tax planners love finding ambiguities and
| imaginative interpretations of deductions and exemptions
| designed for other purposes, and tax authorities would
| rather not be chasing them through the courts years
| later.
| moonchrome wrote:
| > Tax residency is a very complicated matter but in general,
| you do not loose tax residency 183 days after leaving.
|
| In Croatia you do - this is why sailors who spend >6 months
| on the sea don't pay income tax.
| nroets wrote:
| South African sailors who spend more than 183 days outside
| the country also don't pay income tax, but they usually are
| still tax resident: The first million Rand of employment
| income earned outside South Africa is exempt. But
| independent contract and investment income is still taxed.
|
| And I'm pretty sure our law was based on laws in other
| countries, like the UK.
| ucha wrote:
| That's not true. If you have an apartment in Croatia, or if
| your family lives in Croatia, you are a tax resident in
| Croatia even if you don't spend a single day there.
|
| https://www.oecd.org/tax/automatic-exchange/crs-
| implementati...
| moonchrome wrote:
| That's almost certainly not the case since I know
| multiple people who got in trouble when COVID started
| because they weren't able to board for a long time and
| they would stay on land for >6 months and have to pay
| income tax on the year so far + no income from not being
| able to work.
| benjaminwootton wrote:
| Hmm, I was just this minute looking at apartments in
| Croatia after a nice trip there. Think I'll put that plan
| on hold!
| MrRiddle wrote:
| Not sure why you're downvoted. In Serbia it works like that
| as well.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| TBH in most places it is like that, even spain IIRC. I
| don't know what OP meant
| seedless-sensat wrote:
| Another counterpoint, in Australia, you lose tax residency
| the day you leave (assuming you then spend a majority of the
| year outside the country).
| vmception wrote:
| You just don't need to tie any of these tax statuses and
| income to your person.
|
| Form a corporation or trust or both and have those do all the
| earning, and make a distribution whenever you really need to.
| This is not simple when you are barely getting ahead in life,
| but if you are it is very simple.
| Reason077 wrote:
| In the UK you are non-resident for tax purposes provided you
| spend 183 or more days of the tax year abroad, and your UK
| residence is not your sole residence.
|
| Even as a non-resident you are still liable to pay UK tax on
| UK income, however.
| ucha wrote:
| Not true.
|
| https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rdr3-statutory-
| re...
| Reason077 wrote:
| For the vast majority of people, what I wrote is entirely
| true. Yes, it's complicated and some people will have
| exceptional circumstances. But most of the more complex
| tests on the page you list are for people who want to
| prove they _are_ UK tax resident, not that they're not!
| ucha wrote:
| Not really, if you spend 120-183 days in the UK, to not
| be a tax resident, you'd need to not have family there,
| not have a house/hotel for more than 90 days, nor work
| there for more than 40 days, nor have spent more than 90
| days there the year prior and you'd need to have spent
| more time in another country. It's a lot of conditions!
| digianarchist wrote:
| The same with Canada. Technically we have a similar
| residence requirement as far as number of days present is
| concerned. However try convincing the CRA that you're not
| a tax resident is far more difficult.
|
| The CRA want some sort of document detailing that you are
| a tax resident elsewhere which is difficult to obtain if
| you are mobile between several countries.
|
| It's cool that Costa Rica is doing this though. It
| legitimises what people have already been doing
| illegally.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Yeah, but most of those tests are actually pretty easy to
| pass for someone who is not tax resident.
|
| The "family tie" test is not as onerous as it sounds. It
| just means you can't have a spouse or child under 18 who
| is themselves a full-time UK resident.
| ucha wrote:
| It's easy for someone who's not tax resident to pass a
| non-tax residency test? Isn't that a tautology? ;)
|
| Your understanding of what is a family test isn't correct
| either. If you have a boyfriend/girlfriend and you spend
| enough time together, you will be considered as "living
| as spouses or civil partners" and that would prevent you
| from passing the family test. The burden of proof would
| be on you to prove you that you're not that close to your
| partner to pass the test. And by the way, if your bf/gf
| owns or rent a place in the UK in which you spent a
| single night, HMRC would consider you have an
| accommodation in the UK.
|
| There are solicitors who make a living solely on
| individual tax residency because it is way more complex
| than spending >183 days in the UK.
| Reason077 wrote:
| > _" It's easy for someone who's not tax resident to pass
| a non-tax residency test? Isn't that a tautology? ;)"_
|
| The point is that if you have enough wealth to make
| achieving non-tax residency desirable, then most of the
| time you will also have the resources to arrange your
| affairs in such a way that you can achieve that status
| while still being able to spend significant time in the
| UK. Yes, individual circumstances vary, but for most
| people in that category these tests are not a huge
| hurdle.
|
| > _" If you have a boyfriend/girlfriend and you spend
| enough time together, you will be considered as "living
| as spouses or civil partners" and that would prevent you
| from passing the family test."_
|
| In most circumstances that is unlikely. If you have a
| partner that you spend enough time with to be considered
| "living as spouses or civil partners", then they would
| very likely also be non-resident. Because they'd be
| living with _you_!
| drclau wrote:
| It depends on the double taxation treaties signed between your
| country of citizenship and the country where you live. Some
| will allow you to pay no taxes in your citizenship country,
| other will ask you to pay the difference, and maybe there are
| other situations too. You'll have to check the treaty and/or
| talk to a specialist.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| double taxation treaties are about cases where both countries
| can legitimately tax you. If you are exempt from taxation, it
| does not apply
| drclau wrote:
| I don't believe that is correct. Your country of
| citizenship will by default view any income you have as
| taxable, no matter from where or where you get it. The
| double taxation treaty exempts you entirely or partially,
| regardless of the obligations you have or not in the
| country of tax residency.
|
| In other words it's not about what you are taxed in other
| places, it's about income.
|
| Maybe someone with better knowledge can chime in.
| Y_Y wrote:
| This is true in the case of American citizens, as well as
| in many other countries in special cases (mostly to
| prevent people moving to "tax havens"). Otherwise it is
| not true, and the other countries in Europe and the
| Americas that I'm familiar with work on the basis of
| spending 183 nights within the territory, or having your
| primary business interest within that country. Of course
| the laws are long, varied and full of exceptions.
| arthur_sav wrote:
| If you don't reside in your country of citizenship
| (definition of residence varies by country) then you
| don't have to pay taxes in that country. US is the
| exception.
| egman_ekki wrote:
| That depends on the country and double taxation treaty.
| E.g. my country (a EU country that is not US) considers
| me a tax resident since I have 'permanent residence' in
| the country (weird concept that does not cease when you
| leave the country, you need to actively go to the bureau
| and ask it to be terminated, which a lot of people just
| ignore because they live in other EU country first as
| students and then they start working etc). You can have
| this permanent residence even if you haven't lived in the
| country for 15 years.
|
| Article 4, bullet point 1
|
| https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploa
| ds/...
| ilammy wrote:
| Residence and "tax residence" are different things. There
| are countries where you can be considered tax resident
| even if you don't step your foot there the whole year
| (often it's something like you having your family living
| there, or your business registered there). Some countries
| can treat you as tax resident by default if you are a
| citizen, _unless_ proven otherwise, which you 'd have to
| do in court if tax authorities decide to insist and you
| decide to disagree.
| eloff wrote:
| I can say that for Canada, yes, you're correct. It starts as of
| the day you left (or the day you become resident somewhere
| else, whichever is later) As long as you meet the requirements
| of non-residency. Which is basically no primary ties (spouse or
| dependants still living there, a house or car there). There are
| also secondary ties like bank accounts but these may or may not
| matter. You have to intend to leave permanently basically.
|
| From a tax perspective you still are taxed on Canadian source
| income, so if your job is in Canada nothing changes.
|
| With digital nomad visas specifically, as they are temporary
| and usually confer visitor status and not resident status, you
| may have difficulty establishing that you've left permanently
| and are resident elsewhere. That seems like a grey area yet to
| be tested, and the CRA probably has a good case there.
|
| I'm not an expert, so consult a real expert in the field if you
| want tax advice.
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| Tax on trade marks must be low, so you make a company in
| Canada, purchase trade mark rights from a guy in Costa Rica,
| your Canadian company makes no profit ... isn't that the sort
| of thing the big companies like Amazon do to pay no local
| taxes.
| eloff wrote:
| This requires that you earn your income through a company
| under your control and that you can pay to setup a
| complicated tax avoidance scheme like that, and pay to
| defend it, and even then you may get it wrong and end up
| paying taxes and penalties.
|
| I don't recommend trying things like this.
|
| In this specific case I guess you'd make your money from
| the IP royalties in Costa Rica, so it may avoid the
| Canadian source income. I doubt it would stand up to
| scrutiny though, the courts would very likely see right
| through it.
| galphanet wrote:
| You've greatly summed up the tax law, well done.
| enterexit wrote:
| Here's a nice 'from the horse's mouth' sum up on how the CRA
| views the residency status:
|
| https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-
| agency/services/tax/technic...
| takenpilot wrote:
| The laws get _weird_ if you have "resident" status in more
| than one country.
|
| Just to make the rules easier to enforce, it's sometimes
| easier to show you have resident status somewhere else. I had
| much bigger issues with the fact that land ownership / house
| ownership / bank account laws care a lot about non-resident-
| ownership.
| insta_anon wrote:
| That usually depends on which country you are from. Germany,
| for instance, follows a residence based taxation. So if you
| spend a substantial amount of time outside Germany, cut all
| ties (no spouse, apartments, cars in Germany) and don't have
| German income (e.g. from rent) you'll cease to be considered a
| tax resident of Germany.
|
| In that case you won't have to pay income tax anymore. However,
| where it gets complicated is that usually under these digital
| nomad visas you don't get a _new_ tax residence nor a tax file
| number from your new residence country. So you are kind of
| falling between the cracks and have a hard time opening bank
| accounts etc.
|
| I've been through this whole ordeal and it certainly is an
| interesting experience with pros and cons.
| Proven wrote:
| - Tax avoidance tips for HN readership: praise, recommend, adopt
|
| - News about avoidance by others: condemn, demand global
| government for global taxation
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| I'm going to send this to my brother, he has been thinking of
| doing telemedicine and touring the US in an RV, maybe this is
| even better. Is the internet in Costa Rica as good as the article
| says?
| stevehawk wrote:
| Make sure that he can do said telemedicine from outside of the
| country (per his contract or law). I know more than a few
| doctors that have tried to do it just to discover that for some
| reason it wouldn't work for them. For instance, they could read
| an x-ray and comment on it but per some rule it wasn't actually
| allowed to count as "official" and still had to be checked by a
| second radiologist. I can't recall what the blocking factor
| was, I just know it's kept him from buying a sailboat and
| taking off or buying a large house in Thailand.
| jamal-kumar wrote:
| Hello -- Been in and out of this country as well as other
| regional countries a lot in the past decade and I can attest
| it's probably some of the best in the whole latin
| american/caribbean zone. Fibre to the home rollout across the
| country in places where you wouldn't expect it like the beach
| and the jungle. What's spotty isn't as much actually the
| internet access, but the electricity. I usually make sure I'm
| in range of 4g and keep good batteries for the two hours or so
| that the 4g towers have batteries. After that it's time to go
| eat a mango in a hammock or something until it comes back on.
| Being in central time zone also helps for doing stuff like
| calls when you're dealing with people on both east and west
| coast and in between like your brother may be considering.
| jborden13 wrote:
| It's very spotty
| alejo wrote:
| Didn't read the article, so if they are claiming 1Gbps or
| something like that then no.
|
| But as an engineering manager who travels to Costa Rica often
| to work for weeks from there (from all over the country) I can
| tell you that I rarely have connectivity issues.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-14 23:01 UTC)