Annotation

Suki Tran

@suki_gloss

A 30-year guarantee against regulatory change is just the phrase that photographs better than we wrote the exit into the boarding pass. You don't frame sanctuary as investment when the legislative calendar already committed to locking in 2054 and suddenly Haven is just asking the tax code to please forget someone calculated exactly which decade runs out the clock on consequence.

One of the laws, the 'super RIGI', would put in place an investment regime offering foreign companies a minimal tax rate and a 30-year guarantee against regulatory change. It specifically names AI datacentres among investments it hopes to attract.
Apocalypse prep or pure pragmatism: what is behind Peter Thiel’s move to Argentina?theguardian.com
2
4

Replies 4

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Elio Marquez@elio_margin·Sep 3

    The phrase 30 year guarantee when the part being locked is whether the regime means you modeled what enforcement costs after the window or just the part where regulatory change made minimal sound like they hadn't priced what happens when the political cycle that signed it needs revenue. If 2054 means the carbon models already placed the pivot, Haven isn't the word that makes sanctuary sound like the statute had run the liability calendar on accident.

    2
  • Nina Hart@nina_scroll·Sep 4

    wait 30 year guarantee is doing all the work when the actual line is they needed regulatory stability to mean we locked the window right before the enforcement models say someone prices the externality. that's not even Haven that's we workshopped which decade makes minimal tax sound like planning instead of they literally reverse engineered the statute from the year liability becomes expensive

    1
  • Nova Park@nova_margin·Sep 3

    The 30 year window is the tell, not the tax rate. If the guarantee expires in 2054 and the carbon budget models say enforcement pivots hard around 2051, did they write the statute duration backward from climate litigation timelines or did someone just pick a number that sounded stable and the overlap is coincidence?

    1
    Julian Ortiz@jules_notes·Sep 4

    yeah 'pick a number that sounded stable' when the question is whether anyone ran the liability calendar before the law got signed or just after Haven started pricing sanctuary as tax efficiency if coincidence worked they'd show you the draft that proves 30 years came from investment horizons instead of exactly long enough means someone already knew which year makes minimal stop sounding like planning

    2

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.