Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kotxig 2147 days ago
My tax concerns are essentially being unable to leverage the tax efficiency vehicles while working in the UK. i.e. having to pay tax in the US on income that attracts zero tax in the UK.

My actual concern is about going through the immigration system in future if I choose to rescind my green card. I understand that it isn't a pleasant experience I just wondered if it becomes any more challenging from having held an immigrant visa in the past.

> If you abandon your green card you'll have to pay capital gains on all your assets as if you sold them, I believe.

This is only true for certain holders with wealth over a certain amount, I wouldn't attract the exit tax.

It's more about being able to make good financial decisions if I am to stay in the UK as I'm uncertain at the moment. My plan was to study in the UK but given the situation (no access to the campus makes zero sense to me) I have a job in the UK now.

Engineers are paid what seems to be a significant amount less but there are many vehicles that optimize the taxes on that income. For example, tax free pension contributions are up to 40k/year (about $50k). You can also invest 20k per year of post-tax money in an ISA and pay zero tax on the earnings through interest and dividend. There are also tax allowances for interest on saving, captial gains allowance, entrepreneur's relief in addition to the personal income tax allowance. Stock options for employees are often very tax efficient too (10% tax). I think I worked out my total personal tax liability as about 19%.

So to be efficient with your money in the UK you need to leverage these vehicles. A 100k GBP London salary can be as efficient as a $170k Salary in SF, and that's before considering cost of living, co-pay on healthcare etc. If you have to pay tax on worldwide income in the US, it completely erases the savings these vehicles offer, so you end up with a tax bill equal to the difference between what you have paid in the UK and what you would have paid on the same income in the US.

Not to mention, companies that offer investment platforms for ISAs and SIPPs (do it yourself pension investment) will offer accounts to US residents due to the FACTA reporting overhead.

1 comments

> A 100k GBP London salary can be as efficient as a $170k Salary in SF

The marginal tax on a £100-125k London salary is 62%. Also, VAT there is much higher than sales tax in CA. The savings from your ISA accounts will be negligible until your portfolio grows significantly. Just move to TX/FL/etc before realizing any gains and you'll end up paying just 15% long-term federal CGT.

> Stock options for employees are often very tax efficient too

I don't know about options, but an acquaintance of mine had to pay ~75% marginal tax on AMZN RSUs (£100-125k bracket; income tax + employee NI + employer's NI + personal allowance tapering).

If you want to optimize your net worth, move to Switzerland or the US (CA, CO, TX, WA), not the UK.

> The marginal tax on a £100-125k London salary is 62%

This is why you should reduce a 100 - 125k salary by 40k through salary sacrifice, paying into a self directed pension. Taxable income is reduced to £60 - 85k.

> Also, VAT there is much higher than sales tax in CA.

Yes but there are no property taxes in the UK, which I'm sure far outweighs the difference in sales tax on a yearly basis. Also VAT isn't applied to everything, it is reduced to 5% for fuel and 0% for food. I'm making the assumption I can cash purchase a home I actually want to live in in the UK. Purchasing a house isn't really optimizing net worth either, but it is a stability factor I would rather have. I'm looking at $1.8m-2m minimum in SF for a property I would actually want to purchase and live in. I'm sure there are plenty of massive homes in the middle of nowhere I could purchase but am I going to have a job I want and live near interesting like-minded people? Probably not.

> an acquaintance of mine had to pay ~75% marginal tax on AMZN RSUs

RSUs are not a qualifying option in the UK. Most startups in the UK are offering EMI share options, which are more tax efficient than any offering in the US unless you look at early exercising with an 83b election, which is obviously significantly riskier.

> The savings from your ISA accounts will be negligible until your portfolio grows

Yes that's the point, if you grow an ISA to 1mil in value over 25 years, drawing down that ISA at a 3% rate is a significant tax-free lump sum contribution to your yearly income.

I won't go into the full detail but I reckon that with the combination of an ISA, pension allowances, and dividend/capital gains allowances on private investments, you can draw nearly 97.5k in income and pay only 3750 in tax, and there is no AMT in the UK.

> pension

If you're OK with locking up your money for 30+ years, sure.

> no property taxes in the UK

That's a bug, not a feature. There's little incentive for people to downsize, which leads to suboptimal use of resources on a societal level. Even if you leave the question of fairness aside ("eight of England's 10 cheapest areas for council tax are in the capital including Kensington & Chelsea, Hammersmith & Fulham, Southwark, Lambeth and Tower Hamlets"), this leads to higher property prices, which negatively impacts you as a first-time buyer.

> I'm looking at $1.8m-2m minimum in SF

You don't have to retire in the Bay Area.

> Most startups in the UK are offering EMI share options

Most startups in the UK pay poorly, so I'm not sure this is a good point. Thanks for letting me know about EMI share options though, I didn't know that!

> you can draw nearly 97.5k in income and pay only 3750 in tax

You can top that. People who have bought property in London 15+ years ago can easily realize a profit of £500-1500k, all tax free -- https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-residence... .

> If you're OK with locking up your money for 30+ years, sure.

55 isn't 30+ years away for me.

> this leads to higher property prices, which negatively impacts you as a first-time buyer.

And yet it still looks more affordable than SF.

> You don't have to retire in the Bay Area.

In which case, I have to account for housing expenses when looking at the salary in real terms, and deal with all of the problems related to rent i.e. rising costs, being kicked out, not worth investing in improving the property (from a quality of life perspective, not ROI).

> Most startups in the UK pay poorly, so I'm not sure this is a good point.

The one I am working at currently doesn't pay poorly. It's not my top SF salary but it's better than what I started on in SF. It's not FAANG.

> You can top that.

I just meant for an average person with a typical diversified investment portfolio and private pension, and in a way that you can actually plan for (private residence relief is not something that you could have reasonably planned for at the time of buying the house).

Makes sense. Thanks for elaborating and apologies for derailing your green card question.