News

Keep Antagonizing John Paulson And Maybe He Takes His Ball And Goes Offshore

As you may have heard, after occupying downtown Manhattan for the last 25 days, those protesting Wall Street (etc) announced that they’d be making a trip up North, with stops at the Upper East Side homes of, among others, Jamie Dimon and John Paulson. Before they made an appearance at the Paulson and Co founder’s house, JP issued the following statement/suggestion:

“The top 1% of New Yorkers pay over 40% of all income taxes, providing huge benefits to everyone in our city and state. Paulson & Co. and its employees have paid hundreds of millions of dollars in New York City and New York State taxes in recent years and have created over 100 high paying jobs in New York City since its formation. New York currently has the highest income taxes of any state in the country and thousands of businesses have fled New York to states with no income taxes such as Florida, Texas and Nevada, or moved offshore.

Instead of vilifying our most successful businesses, we should be supporting them and encouraging them to remain in New York City and continue to grow.”

Apparently organizers of the march were not swayed and after choosing not to take the advice, made their planned stop at Paulson’s townhouse, where they left him a (slightly mixed) message of their own.


[JustinElliot via BI]

Sure, it could be sarcasm but maybe it’s a dare? In which case, you picked the wrong guy to take a risk on cashing that thing.

John Paulson Has A Message For The Protestors [BI]

45 comments
(hidden for your protection)
Show all comments

45 Responses to “Keep Antagonizing John Paulson And Maybe He Takes His Ball And Goes Offshore”

  1. Spanishmoon says:

    At least it wasn't another redemption notice………..

  2. Mexi_Cant says:

    Didn't these idiots read my post in the opening bell? He's getting a tax refund this year!

  3. Guest says:

    No stop at the Soros house? Or is he still a foreign citizen and therefore not technically part of "the [presumably American] one percent"?

  4. Nailz6 says:

    You think B of A will take this? I didn't make payroll in September.

    – J. Paulson

  5. J. Paulson says:

    In an interesting twist I've decided to run my funds into the ground to avoid paying taxes and to prove my point: You will miss the tax money you ungrateful bastards.
    No Really, I'm doing it on purpose.

  6. Just trying to help says:

    They are doing it wrong!

    May I suggest better candidates for a home visit:
    Chuck Prince
    Stan O'Neal
    Franklin Raines
    Dick Fuld
    Angelo Mozilo
    Mom and Pop at Golden West
    Joe Cassano
    Feel free to add more names as home visit candidates for the OWS team.

  7. Dr_Rosenrose says:

    I respect the fact that as a hedge fund manager, there was never a dime of government money sent his way. I really respect the balls it takes to call -47% YTD "most successful".

  8. Fuck Wall Street says:

    I'm sick and tired of these cocksuckers and their empty threats. I wish Washington would just freeze their assets and set the IRS on their asses to hound them into early graves. Remember scumbags the government has forever.

  9. early_hominid says:

    "I fart in your general direction, you tiny-brained wipers of other people's bottoms. Now go away before I taunt you a second time."

    – That little devil on John's shoulder.

  10. Advantage plus l.p. says:

    Torch that fuckin place.

  11. jcocktosen says:

    This is why he bought a unit in Olympic tower…

  12. Not Impressed says:

    I say Paulson try to have the check deposited, and then get the protesters arrested for check fraud.

  13. Guest Schwed says:

    Where are the customers' capital gains taxes?

  14. Golden Boy says:

    Fucking Paulson!!!!!!!!!

    -Harvey Keitel

  15. JPaulson says:

    Qu'ils mangent de la Brioche!

  16. Guest says:

    I think they used Kinko's to do this. Isn't that big business?

  17. It is now reported that John Paulson has said that he is not planning to change his tax residence to PR, but it is worth looking at the ramifications if someone like him did actually move.

    Whether you think it fair or not, a natural outcome of a "progressive" (i.e. accelerated) tax system is that the top 1% of tax payers contribute over a third of all tax revenues collected. This means that there is a tremendous overdependence on a small number of people for a HUGE portion of tax revenues. Therefore it is worth looking more closely at this group of "Golden Geese".

    Contrary to Occupy Wall Street rhetoric, this group is hardly homogeneous. Remember that both Michael Moore and the head of Goldman Sachs are not only in the top 1% but most certainly part of the top 0.1%. They are certainly not alike in political outlook, attitude towards taxation or methods of accumulating wealth. About the only real common factor is that as a result of globalization, the Golden Geese are no longer bound to the tax home of their birth to make and maintain their wealth. In business terms, the Golden Geese are not "sticky".

    Combine overdependence with lack of stickiness and you have a recipe for financial disaster. To put this in better perspective, it is worth noting that the top 400 taxpayers in the US in 2008 (the last year I have done the calculations) contributed 1.9% of ALL OF THE US TAX REVENUE COLLECTED. In 2007, it was 2.05%. Assuming that with increased concentrations of wealth that this number is stable (probably increasing), this means that if even 1/4 of these taxpayers (Note: Paulson is certainly one of them) leave the US tax system, this will have a drop of 0.5% in all future US tax revenues. This would make the sequester cuts look like a rounding error.

    Is this group leaving? Unfortunately the measuring methods are retrospective and so you don't know they are gone, until long after their departure. However, given that Paulson was supposed to be the 11th (not the first) US taxpayer to move to PR AND that US expatriations (where the taxpayer leaves the US system completely) have been increasing dramatically and expodentially in the last few years, one would be foolish to ignore this trend.